The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the federal law that bars gambling on individual sporting events in most of the country, in a ruling likely to unleash a race among the states to attract billions of dollars in legal wagers.
Ruling in a New Jersey case, the court said the 1992 law unconstitutionally forced states to maintain laws that ban gambling. Nevada is the only state where single-game wagering is now legal.
Sports gambling could begin in a matter of weeks in casinos and racetracks in New Jersey, which instigated the legal fight by repealing its gambling prohibition. Mississippi, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware and West Virginia could follow soon, and the number of states might reach double digits by the end of the year.
Casino stocks, including Scientific Games Corp., Boyd Gaming Corp., MGM Resorts International and Caesars Entertainment Corp., jumped after the decision. Other companies such as online gaming giant The Stars Group Inc. and International Speedway Corp. also climbed.
The vote was 6-3 to strike down the entirety of the federal prohibition.
Americans place $150 billion a year in illegal sports bets, according to the casino-backed American Gaming Association. The research firm Eilers & Krejcik Gaming puts the number at $50 billion to $60 billion, not counting bets among friends.
The ruling starts a new era for the largest sports leagues, which fought New Jersey in court even while moving toward embracing legalized sports wagering. In January, a National Basketball Association executive told New York lawmakers the leagues should get 1 percent of all bets. The NBA says it would prefer a new federal law to set nationwide standards.
The lead case is Murphy v. NCAA, 16-476.
Too fast for me Todd, et al. Was just going to send a news tip about this.
My hope, along with others is, maybe if some state would challenge that antiquated 1962 law prohibiting lottery sales across state lines it might get its long overdue demise. I had written my ACLU about this years ago and not even a response from them. To me it is borderline violating my First Amendment rights...who knows?
IGT stock up too!!
Oh well................. Bet away, I stick to lotteries and scratchers
"that antiquated 1962 law prohibiting lottery sales across state lines"
I haven't seen the reasoning behind the ruling in the current case, but I'll guess that unequal treatment of states is part of it. What would be the basis for overturning a law prohibiting gambling across state lines? Regulation of interstate commerce is one of the powers specifically granted to the federal government, so the law would have to conflict with some other part of the constitution.
"borderline violating my First Amendment rights"
How do you figure that? A blanket prohibition against a particular interstate activity on every day of the week certainly doesn't run afoul of religious freedom (and the court upheld blue laws that very clearly developed from a religious basis, albeit almost 60 years ago). Actions can certainly be protected speech, but I'm not seeing the argument that interstate wagering is a form of protected speech. Peaceful assembly? I'd love to hear an argument for that.
That's not to say that the court wouldn't just decide they don't like the law and come up with some tortured logic to justify the decision, but what's the legitimate argument?
No doubt for gamers nationwide, this is finally a winner for most states over as the wheel of progress like the roulette keeps spinning.....
Pro-Player & FairGame Advocate
Eddessa_Knight with Freedom's Light
Sports Illustrated has a nice article explaining it.
Article I, Section 9 US Constitution:
"No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another:"
Not 100% sure, but that might be the reasoning behind the SC ruling.
The analysis is in multiple places and I find it very clear reasoning. States rights,
the individual states can decide the issue, and there was no comprehensive federal law on the issue. So, in a sense, Bleudog was on the right track.
First paragraph specifically states the Federal law banning this from 1992. Glad the states can be sovereign and do as they please. Anticipate a cash cow from the 32 current states the media just said (CBS News) considering it.
The federal law did not cover all the states...only most of the states. That was a major deciding factor.
Although I have zero interest in sports betting, I support states making their own decisions without big brother regulating everything.
.
Yes, and I've yet to hit any significant amount, from either MM or PB.
But, about a month ago, I actually hit the MM for $200. (two hundred samolians)
That little win put confidence back in my game (I'm convinced that there are larger prizes in the game.).
It was such a surprise (I actually prefer the redneck pronunciation of "sooprize").
Please don't mind my reference to "redneck", I actually got the term "sooprize" from the movie:
"Squirm", where a Southern town becomes inundated with worms, after a series of storms.
Then, after I collected my prize, I came home, and looked up my MM win, and it turned out that "only" 775 people or something like that actually won that same amount, of all the people who played MM on that day. The odds are mind-bogglingly slim to win anything.
Mr. Groppo
Bookies aren't going to like this at all.
At some point in the late 1980s Delaware flirted with sports betting. Instead of going to the actual lines makers though they had state employees guess at what the odds should be.
Word of this got out in Nevada and wise guys were flying to Delaware to profit from the skewed odds, and profit they did.
This will get interesting if it catches on though. It's said that the point spread only affects 1% of football games. Most people who bet it say that's not their experience. It takes 52.6% winners to break even thanks to the 'vig'. That is 110 to win 100.
The bookies and sports books strive to keep a balanced book, equal action on both sides of a game. Thus the losers pay the winners and the house keeps the vig. (Vigorish).
The real money is to be made in baseball with money line parlays, but most people bet football.
NFL 10 team parlay can pay $60,000 or more...
Thats real money to me...
So are bookies out of business in the near future?
Think about the states that don't/didn't/won't have sports betting and that answers your own question. Supreme Court gave blanket authority to states that WANT to do . Honestly, could you see certain states that I won't mention because it always offends someone on LP going into this. Hint: Most of them don't have a lottery.
Being retired US ARMY--GO ARMY--I don't like the antiquated 1962 forbidding me from picking up the phone and say order MM/ PB tickets from California or Heaven forbid the Internet. I can, thankfully, buy MegaBucks Doubler (Mass) over the phoneline and even ordered a Season Ticket for my Arizona LP friend. This is what I'm talking about, maybe it isn't a First Amendment Rights Issue, I get that. I do feel that living in this country I don't need Big Brother dictating what I can and cannot do with my money. Screw that. For those who have served Honorably as this Soldier did it is a big deal, but you know what? Life goes on and I've got bigger fish to fry.
Been totally retired now for four months now and LIFE IS GOOD!
Thank you for your service.
Artist77,
Probably not.
Kyle7824,
10 team parlay? anything beyond a 3 or 4 teamer is considered a Keno ticket, not a football bet.
Although the sports leagues, especially in my opinion the college athletic leagues are losers in this situation, eventually they are going to want to figure out a way to make money off of this.
There will always be better bettors than others. They will win big.
The politicians have new dollar signs in their eyes!
$$$$$$$$$$$$
Their grubby little hands already itching like there's no tomorrow. Cha ching is all they know anymore. Lottery and casino is all the kid is going to do, no speculation on any sports.
True, but they are rare.
There was a guy in Vegas who could not walk into a sports book and make his own bets because if he did there would have been a line of people behind him wanting $100 worth of whatever he just bet, so he always had to 'send in a beard'.
He bet sides and over/unders, not parlays.
"Heart bets" destroy a lot of bettors (favorite teams).
Glancing @ different newspapers around the country and casino websites it is interesting how fast states/casinos are gearing up for this.
This doesn't interest me in the least, but they must be spot on with $$$ flashing in their greedy eyes.
Off to the store to cash in my huge $4 Mega Millions win....lol!
Interesting news item;
WILL ILLEGAL BOOKIES GO OUT OF BUSINESS?
Probably not, said Kate Lowenhar-Fisher, a Las Vegas-based attorney who chairs the gaming practice at Dickinson Wright. Illegal bookies have longstanding relationships with their customers, some of whom prefer the anonymity of gambling offshore, and they don't have to pay taxes or fees. Plus, with states legalizing sports betting in a piecemeal fashion, illegal operators will continue to be more convenient for many bettors.
Savvy businesspeople are also likely to create new gambling products that aren't specifically addressed by state laws, just as daily fantasy sports companies did while the federal ban was in place.
"Americans will continue to be entrepreneurial, especially finding a way to evade all the compliance costs, tax costs, regulatory costs," Lowenhar-Fisher said. "That's exactly what the fantasy sports operators tried to do — offer sports betting without having to deal with all the things a sports book operator has to deal with."
http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20180515/AP/305159873
After the Supreme Court ruling, the NCAA president is callingfor a federal regulatory framework for sports gambling. Hopefully someone will explain to Mark Emmert why the SC lifted the ban.
I wonder if this will get the NFL to admit that there really are point spreads on the games.
Here in Md, the state legislature will have to decide whether or not to have a vote, to change the state constitution to allow sports gambling. So far they are saying it won't happen this year. As long as they took to finally allow casinos in the state, it could be 5 years before it happens.
If other states need to do the same thing, it may not be the slam dunk to allow it that everyone thinks it will be. At least not right away.