• About Us / Contact
This site contains commercial content
SportsHandle
  • US Sports Betting
    • Arizona Sports Betting
    • Arkansas
    • Colorado
    • Connecticut
    • Delaware
    • Illinois
    • Indiana
    • Iowa
    • Kansas
    • Louisiana
    • Maine
    • Maryland
    • Michigan
    • Mississippi
    • New Jersey
    • New York
    • Ohio Sports Betting
    • Pennsylvania
    • Tennessee
    • Virginia
    • West Virginia
    • Wyoming
  • Pending States
    • California
    • Florida
    • Georgia Sports Betting
    • Massachusetts Sports Betting
    • Missouri
    • North Carolina
  • Canada
    • Ontario
    • British Columbia
    • Alberta
  • Sportsbook Apps
    • FanDuel
    • BetMGM
    • Caesars
    • PointsBet
    • BetRivers
  • Tools
    • Sportsbook Bonuses Explained
    • Guide To ‘Risk-Free’ Bets
    • Common Beginner Mistakes
    • Sports Betting Podcasts
    • Expected Value
    • Sports Scores And Odds Apps
    • Sports Betting Twitter
    • Partnership Tracker
  • News
No Result
View All Result
SportsHandle
  • US Sports Betting
    • Arizona Sports Betting
    • Arkansas
    • Colorado
    • Connecticut
    • Delaware
    • Illinois
    • Indiana
    • Iowa
    • Kansas
    • Louisiana
    • Maine
    • Maryland
    • Michigan
    • Mississippi
    • New Jersey
    • New York
    • Ohio Sports Betting
    • Pennsylvania
    • Tennessee
    • Virginia
    • West Virginia
    • Wyoming
  • Pending States
    • California
    • Florida
    • Georgia Sports Betting
    • Massachusetts Sports Betting
    • Missouri
    • North Carolina
  • Canada
    • Ontario
    • British Columbia
    • Alberta
  • Sportsbook Apps
    • FanDuel
    • BetMGM
    • Caesars
    • PointsBet
    • BetRivers
  • Tools
    • Sportsbook Bonuses Explained
    • Guide To ‘Risk-Free’ Bets
    • Common Beginner Mistakes
    • Sports Betting Podcasts
    • Expected Value
    • Sports Scores And Odds Apps
    • Sports Betting Twitter
    • Partnership Tracker
  • News
No Result
View All Result
SportsHandle
No Result
View All Result

New Jersey’s Sports Betting Case in Supreme Court, Explained By Expert

Brett Smiley by Brett Smiley
October 9, 2017
in Regulation
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

(Note: This story was originally published onΒ Aug 29, 2017)

New Jersey’s sports betting case against the NCAA and the major professional sports leagues still awaits its date for oral argument in the United States Supreme Court, which will occur sometime in the fall or winter. For observers and sports betting enthusiasts, it’s like waiting months for the Super Bowl, but at least we don’t get suckered into watching anything resembling the NFL Pro Bowl.

Prof. Edelman

While New Jersey may represent the side that’s happy to be there, it just may be the slight favorite, too. But that’s certainly up for debate, just like the state’s and leagues’ arguments. (Case docket with the U.S. Supreme Court here).

For insight on the case,Β SportsHandle Editor-in-Chief Brett Smiley spoke to Marc Edelman, Esq., Professor of Law at the Zicklin School of Business, Baruch College, City University of New York. Professor Edelman specializes in and is a frequent speaker on sports law, antitrust law, intellectual property law, and gaming and fantasy sports law. (Emphasis added by SportsHandle).

SportsHandle:Β What do you think is the most important point that New Jersey needs to convey at oral argument?

Prof. Edelman: There really are two. One point needs to be that, albeit not explicitly stated in the Constitution, there is implicitly a principle of equal sovereignty. In treating New Jersey differently from Nevada it is implicitly problematic under the fiber of the Constitution. Second, New Jersey needs to make the argument that the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, the way that it is written, forces particular action on a state and doesn’t simply encourage behavior of a state, nor does it implement directly a federal policy.

SportsHandle: Regarding equal sovereignty, where in the Constitution or under which amendment or is it most clearly implied?

Prof. Edelman: It’s interesting, there is not anything in the Constitution that directly talks about equal sovereignty. Kind of like the right to privacy that some courts have recognized under a penumbra of rights. Some believe there is a limited amount of precedent, including a case from the Supreme Court in the early 1900’s that simply implies equal sovereignty. There is no explicit clause in the Constitution requiring equal sovereignty, and the argument will be made more based upon case law than any particular amendment in itself.

SportsHandle: Do you think New Jersey has a better shot with the anti-commandeering or equal sovereignty argument?

Prof. Edelman: As a matter of public policy I believe the equal sovereignty argument should be the much stronger argument. It would seem easier for lawyers to argue the anti-commandeering point because lawyers will be able to point specifically to the 10th Amendment as well as two Supreme Court cases that directly address the 10th Amendment in the context of anti-commandeering. While as a matter of pure public policy it sounds incredibly reasonable that all states should be treated equally under federal laws but lawyers will not be able to point to a direct statute or language in the Constitution that is explicitly on that point.

SportsHandle: In Ryan Rodenberg’s [Florida State University Associate Professor of Law] amicus brief, I was intrigued by the argument about the nondelegation doctrine, talking about how PASPA basically outsources enforcement to the leagues. Unless I missed it, that issue didn’t come up in either the District Court or Third Circuit. If so, can that even be the basis of an argument in the Supreme Court?

Prof. Edelman: Ryan Rodenberg is a wonderful legal scholar who pays a lot of attention to detail and nuance and has been looking at the issues involved in sports gambling for many years. Any research that is conducted by Professor Rodenberg needs to be taken very seriously given his background and history. As for the particular question as to whether a court decision could turn on a point not initially raised by the parties, the simple answer is yes. In fact, in sports law jurisprudence, the 2011 case Brady versus National Football LeagueΒ that essentially ended the work stoppage in the NFL, the league was allowed to maintain its lockout based upon an obscure provision, one that was not cited by either party in the original brief given the parties had focused primarily on the nonstatutory labor exemption. Yes, it is theoretically possible that a case could be decided on an argument that was not in the briefing. Sometimes arguments that are not raised in the original briefing come up in the oral argument stage based upon questions that are asked by judges during the hearing of oral arguments.

SportsHandle: To me the nondelegation argument seemed equally if not more compelling than either equal sovereignty or anti-commandeering.

Prof. Edelman: To me the most interesting part of Ryan Rodenberg’s brief was the notion of the court upholding PASPA in its majority, but simply overturning the clause that allowed a grandfather to the four states that already allowed the sports gamble. That needs to be scary to states such as Nevada. If Rodenberg is right on that part, and Ryan makes a very compelling argument, it would leave PASPA in place but would end sports gambling in Nevada, at least for the moment.

SportsHandle: I realize that’s a real scenario, but I simply cannot imagine that happening. It’s the Court, not Congress, but they would just be demolishing an entire city and state’s established industry.

Prof. Edelman: It would need to make Nevada very concerned. In the long run, however, I doubt that after this all shakes out one would end up in an environment where there’s no sports gambling whatsoever. At the end of the day, irrespective of what the Supreme Court decides for this moment in time, the long term outcome of sports gambling, in any individual states or the states in totality, will likely be determined by whatever bill is passed next by Congress on the point.

SportsHandle: If New Jersey is successful and PASPA gets repealed, and they implement sports betting, how much do you think it helps the state monetarily?

Prof. Edelman: The problem is that New Jersey casinos are suffering because through Native American gambling and other states changing their laws, New Jersey’s neighboring states are now offering poker, slot machines, and other activities, whereas 20 years ago people were going to Atlantic City if they wanted to play poker or participate in slots. Now there’s opportunities to do that in neighboring and sometimes more desirable states such as New York, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. Should New Jersey win this case, it would have to recognize that it would not just open up the door for New Jersey to have sports gambling, but it would theoretically open up the door for these other states to do it as well.

SportsHandle: New Jersey should get a vig on bets placed in other states that may benefit from all they’ve invested in this quest.

Prof. Edelman: On that note let’s speak about New York for a moment. There have been some pundits suggesting that states such as New York and Mississippi should file similar lawsuits to New Jersey. My view has always been that that would be foolhardy and a waste of taxpayer resources. It makes sense to every state that’s interested in sports gambling that is not New Jersey to simply let New Jersey spend the money from New Jersey’s own coffers, and if New Jersey wins then to attempt to move forward.

SportsHandle: That seems to be the case with the legislation that we’re following. Every state is basically going to wait and see at this point because this is their biggest, best shot, it would seem.

Prof. Edelman: [New Jersey State Senator] Ray Lesniak believes he has this big ticket plan to revitalize Atlantic City. For him to succeed at revitalizing Atlantic City with sports gambling what he would need would be for New Jersey to be allowed to have sports gambling, but keep sports gambling out of the other states. That will not be the result. Much as the same way New Jersey has begun to lose market share in slots and poker to casinos based in neighboring states. It is very likely that the moment that New Jersey starts in sports gambling other states will change their laws and compete in this marketplace as well, taking away any competitive advantage that Atlantic City may have, again, had for a momentary basis.

SportsHandle: So, what kind of regulatory framework could you see taking shape at a state and possibly national level with respect to the betting on professional and amateur sports?

Prof. Edelman: I don’t think it would be feasible, at present, to have federal regulations given first there is no federal agency currently overseeing and regulating gambling. Second, even to the extent PASPA is overturned, there are some in, perhaps, many states that will continue to disallow sports gambling for public policy reasons. What does seem possible, however, is that an association such as the American Law Institute could propose a model law and many states will adopt that model law and recognize reciprocity for registration between the states.

SportsHandle: That’s interesting, because I saw in that the GAME Act proposed by New Jersey Representative Frank Pallone, which is a discussion draft at this point, the Federal Trade Commission would effectively become the enforcement arm. That seems unusual given that it’s all boiling down to federalism in this case.

Prof. Edelman: That seems to be shortsighted of the realities of our government. It is easy to understand why Pallone wants there to sports gambling in New Jersey. But the notion that the federal government is going to want to get involved in regulating sports gambling seems like that will not go too well. If we look at the current policy in this country, America has elected a president under the argument of smaller government, less tax spending, and greater states’ rights. The notion of now having a federal regulatory body to oversee gambling on a national level flies in the face of even the most reasonable aspects of the policies of this administration. It would be doubtful to that s plan come to fruition.

Supreme court judges

SportsHandle: This asks for complete conjecture, but if you had to guess, which Supreme Court Justices were the ones that wanted to hear the case?

Prof. Edelman: That’s very difficult to say. When it comes down to it, at the Supreme Court level, this case seems to be less about the public policy behind gambling and more about the balance between state rights and federal rights based on both the commandeering clause, the 10th Amendment, and the notion of equal sovereignty between states. With that much said, one could make a reasonable guess that judges that look broadly at states’ rights would be the most interested in hearing this case and perhaps reversing this case. It would not be surprising if Justices like Alito, Roberts, and Gorsuch were very interested in this case from the standpoint of broadening the notion of commandeering and further protecting states’ rights.

SportsHandle: Some final thoughts?

Prof. Edelman: Let’s go back to where the discussion began. If nothing else I think there are two points that readers should take away from this discussion. First, while there’s a very interesting and intellectual public policy discussion about the legalization of sports gambling, the case that is before the Supreme Court will likely be looked at by the justices more in terms of states’ rights versus federal rights, rather than a general referendum on sports gambling. Second, at the end of the day, whatever the Supreme Court decides, will likely only be binding for a moment in time. Irrespective of how the Supreme Court ultimately decides this case, Congress legally could vote in a new statute that would change the legal status of sports gambling. At the end of the day it’s unlikely that this matter will be put to bed by what the courts say, but ultimately by what Congress in the long run decides to do.

Check back here often for more discussion on this SCOTUS case and the intersection of Β sports law and sports betting. And go “like” our Facebook pageΒ and follow us on Twitter.

ShareTweetShare
Brett Smiley

Brett Smiley

Brett Smiley is editor-in-chief and co-founder of Sports Handle, which joined forces with the US Bets team in November 2018. He focuses on the sports betting industry and legislation. He's a recreational sports bettor and DFS player himself, focusing on the NFL. In a past life, Smiley practiced commercial litigation in New York City and previously wrote for FOX Sports and SI.com. He lives in New Jersey with his family.

Related Posts

(Matthew Emmons/USA TODAY)
Features

New Jersey Tries To Put DraftKings Proxy Betting Case In Rearview Mirror

May 26, 2022
ncaa-president-mark-emmert
Analysis

NCAA Tweaks Outlook On Sports Betting, But Potential Problems Loom

May 3, 2022
Load More

Top Sportsbooks In Your State

1
WynnBET Sportsbook
Review / 4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
FanDuel Sportsbook
Review / 4.8
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
BetMGM Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
BetMGM Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
Caesars Sportsbook
Review / 4.4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
WynnBET Sportsbook
Review / 4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
Caesars Sportsbook
Review / 4.4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
WynnBET Sportsbook
Review / 4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
BetMGM Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
FanDuel Sportsbook
Review / 4.8
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
SugarHouse Sportsbook
Review / 4.2
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
BetMGM Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
FanDuel Sportsbook
Review / 4.8
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
Caesars Sportsbook
Review / 4.4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
bet365 Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
BetMGM Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
BetRivers Sportsbook
Review / 4.2
BET NOW
T&Cs ApplyOnly 1x Wager Applies
2
FOX Bet Sportsbook
Review / 4.3
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
BetMGM Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
Caesars Sportsbook
Review / 4.4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
WynnBET Sportsbook
Review / 4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
BetMGM Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
Caesars Sportsbook
Review / 4.4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
BetMGM Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
FanDuel Sportsbook
Review / 4.8
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
Caesars Sportsbook
Review / 4.4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
BetMGM Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
FanDuel Sportsbook
Review / 4.8
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
SI Sportsbook
Review / 4.1
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
Caesars Sportsbook
Review / 4.4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
SuperBook Sports
Review / 4.3
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
Caesars Sportsbook
Review / 4.4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
BetMGM Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
BetRivers Sportsbook
Review / 4.2
BET NOW
T&Cs ApplyOnly 1x Wager Applies
1
SI Sportsbook
Review / 4.1
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
Caesars Sportsbook
Review / 4.4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
WynnBET Sportsbook
Review / 4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
Caesars Sportsbook
Review / 4.4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
BetMGM Sportsbook
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
FanDuel Sportsbook
Review / 4.8
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
Caesars Sportsbook
Review / 4.4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
WynnBET Sportsbook
Review / 4
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
Betfred Sportsbook
Review / 3.8
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
BetRivers Sportsbook Ontario
Review / 4.3
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
BetMGM Sportsbook Ontario
Review / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
NorthStar Bets Sportsbook
Review / 4.6
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
Bet99 Sportsbook
Review / 4.7
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
Sports Interaction Ontario
Review / 4.2
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
3
PowerPlay Sportsbook
Rating / 3.8
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
1
Monkey Knife Fight
Rating / 4.5
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.
2
PrizePicks
Rating / 4.2
BET NOW
T&Cs Apply21+. Eligibility restrictions apply. See website for details.

State Sports Betting Guides

Downtown Detroit at twilight (Shutterstock)

Michigan Sports Betting – Where To Play, Online Sportsbooks, And FAQ

by Brett Smiley
June 24, 2022

VA captial

Virginia Sports Betting – Where To Play, Online Sportsbooks And Bonus Offers

by Brett Smiley
March 21, 2021

nj flag

New Jersey Sports Betting — Where To Play, Online Sportsbooks, And FAQ

by Brett Smiley
March 22, 2022

pa online sportsbooks

Pennsylvania Sports Betting – Where To Play, Online Sportsbooks And Bonuses

by Brett Smiley
March 18, 2022

Most Read Stories

mattress mack betting charade

Will Everyone Please Stop Calling β€˜Mattress Mack’ A Sports Bettor?

April 27, 2022
Photo: Jasen Vinlove/USA TODAY

Dave Portnoy Says, ‘F**k That Guy,’ To Which Bettor And Gambling Twitter Seriously Object

May 16, 2022
map-missouri

Missouri Sports Betting Bill Draws Debate, Backlash In Senate

May 5, 2022
golden-gate-bridge-san-francisco

California Tribes Won’t Try For Mobile Proposal On 2022 Ballot

May 10, 2022

Canada Sports Betting Guides

Canada Sports Betting – Best Sportsbook Apps & Bonus Offers

British Columbia Sports Betting – Legal Update, Available Sportsbooks, and FAQ

Ontario Sports Betting – Legal Status And Where To Play

gambling therapy
ncpg
igaming ontario
If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, crisis counseling and referral services can be accessed by calling 1-800-GAMBLER (1-800-426-2537) (IL). Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER (NJ/WV/PA/MI), 1-800-9-WITH-IT (IN),Β 1-800-522-4700Β (CO), 1-800-BETS OFF (IA),Β 1-888-532-3500Β (VA) or call/text TN REDLINEΒ 1-800-889-9789Β (TN).
19+. Please play responsibly. Terms and conditions apply.Β 
Individuals must be 19 years of age or older to participate in igaming in Ontario. Gambling can be addictive, please play responsibly. If you, or someone you know, has a gambling problem in Ontario and wants help, please visit ConnexOntario or call their helpline at 1-866-531-2600. Operators on this website operate pursuant to an Operating Agreement with iGaming Ontario.

Search Sports Handle

No Result
View All Result
  • About Us / Contact

No Result
View All Result
  • US Sports Betting
    • Arizona Sports Betting
    • Arkansas
    • Colorado
    • Connecticut
    • Delaware
    • Illinois
    • Indiana
    • Iowa
    • Kansas
    • Louisiana
    • Maine
    • Maryland
    • Michigan
    • Mississippi
    • New Jersey
    • New York
    • Ohio Sports Betting
    • Pennsylvania
    • Tennessee
    • Virginia
    • West Virginia
    • Wyoming
  • Pending States
    • California
    • Florida
    • Georgia Sports Betting
    • Massachusetts Sports Betting
    • Missouri
    • North Carolina
  • Canada
    • Ontario
    • British Columbia
    • Alberta
  • Sportsbook Apps
    • FanDuel
    • BetMGM
    • Caesars
    • PointsBet
    • BetRivers
  • Tools
    • Sportsbook Bonuses Explained
    • Guide To ‘Risk-Free’ Bets
    • Common Beginner Mistakes
    • Sports Betting Podcasts
    • Expected Value
    • Sports Scores And Odds Apps
    • Sports Betting Twitter
    • Partnership Tracker
  • News

Please share your location to continue.

Check our help guide for more info.

share your location