Chris Christie takes his sports betting case to the Supreme Court
Right now, if I ask you “what’s Chris Christie’s legacy?” I bet the answer is “Bridgegate.”
Well. That might change. In fact, in a few months’ time, Chris Christie’s legacy might be quite different. He might be remembered as the man who allowed you to legally take Cincinnati and the points tonight. (Listen: The Bengals play at the slowest pace in football, they’re home on a Monday night, Big Ben struggles in this type of scenario … I’m taking the points. Anyway …)
Anyway, today, in what at least one legal scholar has called the United States Supreme Court version of Ali-Frazier, arguments will be heard in the case Gov. Christopher J. Christie, Governor of New Jersey, et al vs. National Collegiate Athletic Association, et al (“et al” in this case being the NFL, NBA, NHL, and MLB).
Now. I am not a legal scholar (as far as you know), but the gist of it comes down to this: If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Chris Christie — while arguments start today, a decision isn’t expected until spring — legalized sports betting will be coming to New Jersey, and quite possibly, any other state that wants it.
You want a legacy? That’s a legacy.
This all started in 2011 when us New Jersey voters voted for an amendment to our state constitution that would allow sports betting. The following year, the legislature passed the law. Christie signed the law. But the NCAA and the four major leagues went to federal court to try and block the law, which they claim — and rightly so — violates a 1992 federal law, the Professional and Amatuer Sports Protection Act (PASPA), which basically bans sports wagering except in four states.
Christie and the state’s lawyers didn’t deny our state law flew in the face of PASPA, but their argument was that PASPA violates the 10th Amendment, which is one of those amendments no one ever talks about. For all I know, it could deal with which side of the plate you’re supposed to put the salad knife. (THIS JUST IN: There is no such thing as a salad knife.)
As it turns out, the 10th Amendment deals with states’ rights, and New Jersey’s argument was PASPA is in violation of that.
It didn’t matter. Christie (and New Jersey voters) lost in court.
A few well-crafted state laws and lawsuits later … we still lost at every judicial level. Then Christie and Co. petitioned the Supreme Court, they accepted the case — shocking most SCOTUS watchers, as the Solicitor General of the United States told the court to “fuggedaboutit” in so many words — and so here we are.
Incredibly, according to ScotusBlog post by Elbert Lin and Thomas M. Johnson Jr., the case will have far-reaching implications beyond sports betting, involving the role of Congress either superseding or completely not superseding state laws. They claim this decision, no matter what it is, will directly impact — and possibly in a massive way — the way laws get made in our nation.
So.
Bridgegate wha?
Christie will be in D.C. today, sitting in the Supreme Court, listening to the arguments. Last Wednesday, speaking to reporters in Newark, he said he was “cautiously optimistic that we’re gonna win.”
Me too. It seems odd the Supreme Court would take the case despite the solicitor general saying not to.
Things are changing in New Jersey, and changing fast. Not so farfetched to imagine things this time next year where you’re legally placing a sports bet while simultaneously smoking a legal joint.
Life come at you fast, as the kids say today.
And yes. Bengals +5.5. Not a mortal lock, but I feel pretty good about it.