Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: July 7, 2017
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.com
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie isn’t the only one advocating to lift the national sports betting ban. Momentum is building to eliminate the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA).
Enacted in 1992, the PASPA specifically prohibits governmental entities, including the states, from authorizing sports wagering. The only current exceptions are the states of Nevada, Oregon, Montana and Delaware. The federal sports betting law also authorizes professional and amateur sports organizations, as well as the United States Attorney General, to file lawsuits to enforce PASPA provisions.
Supporters of the PASPA maintain that the law is needed to protect the integrity of the game and help deter gambling addiction. Former U.S. Senator and NBA star Bill Bradley stated that “[a]thletes are not roulette chips, but sports gambling treats them as such. Fmr. Sen. Bradley also stated that “If the dangers of state sponsored sports betting are not confronted, the character of sports and youngsters’ view of them could be seriously threatened.”
Despite the federal ban, sports wagering is on the rise. In 2016, Americans wagered more than $15 billion on the Super Bowl and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) men’s basketball tournament. A staggering 97 percent of the foregoing bets were placed illegally. Given the billion-dollar black market for sports gambling, legalization is increasingly viewed as a means to stimulate the economy, particularly since legislation seems to only drive it underground. A poll by Public Opinion Strategies and Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research found that 57 percent of independents, 58 percent of Republicans, and 50 percent of Democrats favor lifting the federal sports betting ban.
New Jersey’s lawsuit challenging the PASPA is currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. On June 27, 2017, the justices decided to consider New Jersey’s appeal.
In 2012, New Jersey passed a law establishing a regulatory framework for legalized sports betting. The country’s major professional sports leagues and the NCAA filed a lawsuit, which was joined by the Department of Justice. In its defense, the State of New Jersey argued that the federal ban is unconstitutional. It specifically maintained that the power to regulate gambling and benefit from the revenue it generates should rest with the states and not the federal government. New Jersey further argued that the PASPA violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it is not applied equally across all states. The Third Circuit rejected the constitutional challenge and concluded that the State could not regulate sports betting without running afoul of the PASPA. However, the appeals court held that the states retained “much room . . . to make their own policy” and were free to “enforce the laws they choose to maintain.”
Seeking to comply with the Third Circuit’s decision, New Jersey passed a 2014 law that partially repealed State laws prohibiting sports wagering. The sports leagues again filed suit. In response, the State now alleges that it is unconstitutional for the PASPA to dictate the extent to which the states must maintain their prohibitions on sports wagering.
To date, New Jersey has been unsuccessful in convincing a court to agree that the PASPA is unconstitutional. However, the Third Circuit did acknowledge that Gov. Christie is not the only one to raise issues with the PASPA. “PASPA is not without its critics,” the Third Circuit wrote. “It has been criticized for prohibiting an activity, i.e., sports gambling, that its critics view as neither immoral nor dangerous. It has also been criticized for encouraging the spread of illegal sports gambling and for making it easier to fix games, since it precludes the transparency that accompanies legal activities.”
The recently formed American Sports Betting Coalition (ASBC) is actively lobbying to overturn the federal sports betting ban. With a diverse membership that includes the Fraternal Order of Police, National District Attorneys Association, U.S. Conference of Mayors and National Conference of State Legislatures, the legislative solution could prove to be more successful than the judicial one. New Jersey residents, and other states interested in lifting the federal sports betting ban anxiously await the Supreme Court’s decision.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Once a child turns 18, parents lose the automatic legal authority to make medical and financial decisions on their behalf, even if the child still lives at home or remains on the family’s insurance. Three documents close that gap: a durable power of attorney, a health care proxy or directive, and a HIPAA authorization. For […]
Author: George McGowan

Business mediation is a confidential, voluntary process in which a neutral third party helps companies negotiate a resolution to a commercial dispute without going to trial. Because working with a mediator is very different from litigating in the courtroom, it is important to understand how commercial mediation works, when it makes sense for your dispute, […]
Author: Paul Grossman

The five most common causes of construction defect litigation are design defects, substandard materials, workmanship defects, code violations, and subsurface defects. Because these flaws can compromise a building’s integrity, functionality, or safety, they frequently lead to disputes involving multiple parties and high financial stakes. Key takeaways: What is Construction Defect Litigation? Construction litigation is complex, […]
Author: Paul Grossman

The most effective ways to protect your business in a divorce are put in place before one begins: a prenuptial or postnuptial agreement, clean separation of business and personal finances, and divorce contingencies built into your operating or buy-sell agreements. If divorce is already underway, the priorities shift to establishing how the business is classified […]
Author: Jay McDaniel

The most common franchise disputes involve breach of contract, franchise termination and non-renewal, intellectual property rights, territorial encroachment, royalty and fee payments, franchisor support obligations, and violations of state franchise laws such as the New Jersey Franchise Practices Act. Franchisors and franchisees can often resolve these conflicts by providing written notice detailing the dispute and […]
Author: Paul Grossman

New Jersey businesses must manage legal and reputational risk together because modern disputes play out on two fronts at once: the legal proceeding itself and the court of public opinion, where customers, employees, investors, and business partners often reach conclusions long before a judge or jury has had the opportunity to evaluate the facts. Success […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!