New paper highlights importance of New Jersey sports gambling case
The Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Michelle Minton has a new paper highlighting the importance of the Supreme Court ruling the right way in New Jersey’s challenge to the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act. As Michelle explains, and PLF, CEI, Cato, and WILL explained in our amicus brief in the case, PASPA has been a failure. From Michelle’s paper:
A little-known law enacted by Congress in 1992, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), barred all but a handful of states from enacting laws to legalize the activity. As the name implies, its purpose was to protect sports from corruption. Some believed increased gambling on games would increase the likelihood of match-fixing. Yet, over the last 25 years, PASPA has failed to stop the spread of illegal sports gambling, prompted the rise of an enormous gambling black market, increased criminals’ profits, prevented states from raising millions in tax revenue and enacting consumer protections, and made stopping corruption in sports more difficult
The consequences of PASPA extend beyond the black market for gambling. New Jersey’s challenge is one of the biggest federalism cases the Supreme Court has considered in years. You can find out more about the case from our amicus brief, my contribution to a SCOTUS blog symposium, and this blog post on the potential environmental impacts of the case.
The Supreme Court has scheduled oral argument in the case for December 4. So we should have a sense for how the Court is leaning on the case soon.
What to read next
ReasonTV released a new video that showcases our client Peggy Fontenot and her case against the Attorney General of Oklahoma. If you’ll recall, last year, Oklahoma enacted a new law that limits who may market art as American Indian-made.
Justice Don Willett of the Texas Supreme Court endured the partisan gauntlet of the Senate hearing on his nomination to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The hearing only confirmed what has been known for some time: Justice Willett will serve the federal judiciary with integrity, wit, and commitment.
Earlier this year, the City of Seattle shocked the people of Washington—indeed, many across the nation—when it decided to impose an income tax on so-called “high-earners” in direct defiance of the Washington State Supreme Court, which has repeatedly held that the state constitution’s uniformity clause prohibits targeted income taxes.
PLF and several allied organizations submitted a petition for rule-making to the federal agencies that administer the Endangered Species Act. The petition asks the agencies to define “species” and “subspecies,” terms which, although critical to the Act’s operation, are left undefined by statute and regulation.
Next Friday, I’ll be presenting oral argument in the Ninth Circuit in Cedar Point Nursery v. Gould. The case involves a challenge to the ALRB’s access regulation, which allows union organizers to use the private property of agricultural employers to solicit potential union members.