This is very strange.
A new casino development in downtown Chicago is facing accusations of racial discrimination after allegedly blocking White men from investing in the project, a claim that has sparked a lawsuit challenging its legality.
Bally’s Chicago, a $1.7 billion casino and resort set to open in 2026, is poised to become Illinois’ largest casino. Located in the River West area, the casino will feature a 500-room hotel, a rooftop bar, a riverwalk, thousands of slot machines, and a 3,000-seat theater. This is a significant expansion of Illinois’ gambling scene, with Bally’s selected for the project by former Mayor Lori Lightfoot in 2022.
However, controversy surrounds the investment process due to the casino’s agreement with the city, which mandates that 25% of the project’s ownership must be held by minorities. This requirement stems from a 2019 state law designed to expand gambling in Illinois. Investors seeking to participate in Bally’s initial public offering (IPO), which involves a $250 million stake, must meet what is called the “Class A Qualification Criteria.” This criteria specifies that investors must be either “minority” or “woman,” as defined by the city of Chicago’s Municipal Code, including African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians, and other groups deemed “socially disadvantaged.”
The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) has filed a lawsuit against Bally’s and members of the Illinois Gaming Commission on behalf of two would-be investors, Richard Fisher and Phillip Aronoff, who claim they were blocked from participating based on their race. The lawsuit argues that Bally’s actions violate the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the first Ku Klux Klan Act, and long-standing Supreme Court precedents. It also asserts that Bally’s is preventing stock transfers to anyone not meeting the “Class A” criteria.
Dan Lennington, a representative from WILL, criticized the casino’s policies, calling them illegal. He emphasized that restricting investments based on race runs counter to the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Chicago attorney Patrick Callahan, who attempted to invest in the project but was blocked due to his race, described the policy as “blatantly discriminatory.” He also expressed concern over the increasingly divisive environment in the city under current leadership.
The lawsuit could have serious consequences for Bally’s, potentially leading to legal challenges that could jeopardize the casino’s license. According to Bally’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the terms of their Host Community Agreement (HCA) expose them to lawsuits from those excluded by the “Class A” criteria. These lawsuits could result in substantial financial costs and harm to the casino’s operations.
Despite the controversy, Bally’s maintains that its actions comply with the terms of the Host Community Agreement. A spokesperson for the casino told Fox News Digital that the IPO aligns with the city’s requirements. However, both the Mayor’s office and the Illinois Gaming Commission have yet to comment on the lawsuit.
This case raises critical questions about racial preferences in business and investment, and whether such policies are fair or legal in a country founded on the principles of equality and individual rights. If successful, this lawsuit could set a precedent for challenging racially discriminatory practices in corporate America and government-mandated agreements.