A new casino slated to open in the heart of downtown Chicago is facing accusations of violating U.S. civil rights laws by allegedly preventing White men from investing in the project, leading to a lawsuit.
Bally’s Chicago, a .7 billion casino and resort, is set to open in the Windy City’s River West neighborhood in 2026. The expansive complex is projected to be Illinois’ largest casino, featuring a 500-room hotel tower with a rooftop bar, a riverwalk, thousands of slot machines, and a 3,000-seat theater. Bally’s will mark the city’s first casino; its bid was selected by then-Mayor Lori Lightfoot in 2022.
As part of the Host Community Agreement (HCA) signed with the city of Chicago, Bally’s committed to 25% minority ownership. This agreement was drafted in accordance with a 2019 state law aimed at expanding gambling in Illinois. Currently, to participate in the casino’s 0 million initial public offering, investors must meet the “Class A Qualification Criteria,” which stipulates that an investor must be a “minority or woman.”
A minority is defined as “African-Americans, American Indians, Asian-Americans, Hispanics,” and other groups deemed by the city to be “socially disadvantaged,” including Arab Americans, according to the Municipal Code of Chicago.
The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) is suing Bally’s Casino and members of the Illinois Gaming Commission, alleging racial discrimination. WILL represents two prospective investors, Richard Fisher and Phillip Aronoff, who claim they were barred from participating in the project due to their race. Both are affiliated with the American Alliance for Equal Rights, which is also a plaintiff in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit contends that Bally’s is violating the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the first Ku Klux Klan Act, and years of Supreme Court precedent by preventing White men from purchasing stock in the company. Additionally, the suit alleges that Bally’s is restricting shareholders from transferring shares to individuals who do not meet the “Class A” criteria.
“Making a contract is essential to the rights of citizenship. What Bally’s is doing here is absolutely illegal and has been for decades,” stated Dan Lennington of the Wisconsin Institute of Law and Liberty.
Chicago attorney Patrick Callahan, although not a party to the lawsuit, expressed his frustration over being unable to invest in the project due to his race. “It’s so blatantly discriminatory; I can’t imagine how that could possibly be permissible,” Callahan remarked.
At 39 years old, Callahan learned about the casino from a realtor on Instagram and considered it an exciting investment opportunity. However, after filling out his personal information on the Bally’s investment portal, he was prompted to confirm whether he met the “Class A” criteria. Upon indicating that he did not, due to his race and gender, the portal informed him that he could not proceed with the investment.
“This offering is only available to entities who satisfy Class A Qualification Criteria in accordance with the Host Community Agreement with the city of Chicago,” the portal displayed in red text.
Callahan initially thought the criteria were more of a guideline but quickly realized that the investment opportunity was exclusively available to women and certain minorities. He commented on the apparent racial discrimination, noting that while it was not shocking given the current administration under Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, it was still alarming.
The lawsuit from WILL could have serious legal implications for Bally’s, potentially jeopardizing its casino license, according to Lennington.
Bally’s SEC filing indicated that the terms agreed to in the HCA could expose them to lawsuits from individuals who do not meet the “Class A” criteria, which may result in “substantial costs” and adversely impact their ability to operate casinos.
“The Bally’s Chicago IPO complies with our obligations under the Host Community Agreement with the City of Chicago,” a spokesperson for Bally’s stated.
As of now, the Chicago Mayor’s Office and the Illinois Gaming Commission have not responded to requests for comment regarding this issue.