The U.S. Supreme Court could rule on the New Jersey Sports Betting case (officially known as Murphy v. NCCA) as soon as Monday, April 23. If SCOTUS decides that the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) is unconstitutional, states across the country could start allowing sports betting within their borders right away. The decision will have far-reaching implications across the gaming industry plus will benefit states seeking the revenues from this entertainment, which are now only legally available in states like Nevada.
Jeff Ifrah is a leading gaming attorney with Ifrah Law and a founding member of iDEA, a trade association of online gaming interests for which Ifrah Law submitted an amicus brief in this case. The brief argues that Congress overstepped its authority by regulating an activity that had previously been the sole purview of the states, and that PASPA unfairly favors some states by allowing them to grow their betting businesses while denying others the opportunity.
Right now, over 20 states have either passed or introduced bills to legalize sports betting within their borders. All of these bills are, of course, contingent on the still-awaited SCOTUS decision. Even sports leagues, the original opponents to legalization in the case, are preparing for PASPA to be overturned.
Academic research on the impact of gaming shows that this industry is expanding in many positive ways, aided by revolutions in online technology. Current legislative barriers result in a tangible loss of potential revenue to the states without legal sports betting. Compare that with Nevada, where the activity is legal and generates nearly $5 billion a year. When states are not permitted to implement and regulate their own gaming and entertainments, billions of dollars every year are spent elsewhere, usually with offshore accounts and illegal bookies.
If you would like to speak to Jeff on this subject, please contact Amanda Shipley at firstname.lastname@example.org or 440-465-6162.