New Jersey takes sports betting argument to full appeals court | Reuters

But with New Jersey’s eroded casino industry and sluggish economy, the state first allowed sports betting in 2012 until it was stymied by the Third Circuit.

PHILADELPHIA Federal appeals judges on Wednesday scrutinized New Jersey’s 2014 law allowing sports betting, peppering lawyers during oral arguments with questions about the state’s latest attempt to legalize the activity by partially repealing a prohibition against it.

What matters is “what is the law that’s left after the partial repeal,” which in this case “clearly authorizes” sports betting, he said..

“At some point a partial repeal is so specific that it is really authorizing,” said Judge Kent Jordan, asking Theodore Olson, who represented New Jersey, to grapple with the issue.

Just over two weeks ago, Americans placed an estimated $4.1 billion of illegal bets on the National Football League championship, Super Bowl 50, according to the American Gaming Association.

New Jersey tried to allow sports wagering in 2014 by repealing a prohibition against it at casinos and racetracks. government argued that New Jersey’s strategy is tantamount to authorizing the activity in particular locations.

“There would be bookies on the boardwalk,” he said.

Paul Fishman, U.S. The National Collegiate Athletics Association and professional sports leagues sued the state.

Olson argued that Congress is not allowed to commandeer a state’s regulatory powers. But that is further proof that the scheme is tantamount to authorization and violates the federal ban, he argued.

Congress banned legalized U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Philadelphia was before 12 judges who agreed to re-hear New Jersey’s appeal after a three-judge panel previously sided with the sports leagues.

To avoid that, New Jersey’s latest law hinted at some kind of oversight because casinos are licensed and regulated. It continues to try, fighting the legal battle while other states watch.

The hearing in the U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, warned that the wrong kind of partial repeal could be problematic.

“What we have here is a vague, micromanaged tinkering” of the state’s ability to make its own regulations, Olson said.

By Hilary Russ

| PHILADELPHIA

Federal demands on states “are both commonplace and constitutional,” he said.

(Reporting by Hilary Russ; Editing by Alan Crosby)

But the only such commandeering cases to pass muster involved states that were forced to take immediate action to comply with Congress’ mandate, said Paul Clement, arguing for the leagues.

Whichever side loses is likely to ask the U.S. They and the U.S. sports betting in 1992 in all but four states, particularly Nevada. Supreme Court to consider the case

Categories: betting, sports, sports betting

Leave a Reply