Ban on sports betting looks like underdog at high court
Justices weigh constitutionality of 25-year-old law
WASHINGTON – A majority of Supreme Court justices appeared to agree with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Monday that prohibiting sports betting in most states is unconstitutional.
With the outgoing governor seated in the front row, several of the court’s conservative justices said a 1992 federal law impermissibly directed states to keep their bans on the books. They were joined by Justice Stephen Breyer, one of the court’s four liberals.
“It falls within commandeering,” Breyer told Paul Clement, the lawyer representing the NCAA and pro sports leagues who have sought to block New Jersey from legalizing sports betting.
New Jersey repealed part of its ban on sports betting in 2014 in a way that would allow the state to regulate it. U.S. Deputy Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall argued that only a more sweeping repeal that allowed all forms of sports gambling would have been permissible.
That argument didn’t sit well with Chief Justice John Roberts, who said the federal government was preferring no regulation at all to state regulation.
“You have no problem if there’s no prohibition at all, and anybody can engage in any kind of gambling they want?” he said.
Some of the court’s more liberal justices seemed to support the 25-yearold federal law. Justice Elena Kagan said Congress merely was pre-empting state law when it passed the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, something it does regularly.
Congress passed PASPA nearly unanimously to preserve what lawmakers felt was the integrity of the games. Sponsored by then-senator Bill Bradley, D-N.J., the law preceded the advent of Internet gambling.
Christie said, “If the people of those states decide they want to do what Nevada is already being permitted to do, they should be permitted to do it.”
The high court is expected to rule by June.