The Blitz – Special Edition 6/28/17 – Sports Betting Goes to SCOTUS

The Blitz - Sports Betting Goes to SCOTUS

What a wild ride!  After two separate defeats in district and appellate courts, an unfavorable en banc hearing, and a request for the views of the Solicitor General – which recommended the High Court deny review, the Supreme Court announced yesterday that they will indeed hear the New Jersey sports betting case!

This special edition of The Blitz features the best news stories, highlights and a bit of background for those who need to get up to speed.

If you’re not familiar with the NJ sports betting case and the states’ rights issues involved here’s a great place to start:

Those watching the case expected a decision from the Supreme Court on Monday as to whether the justices would agree to hear the case.  Most experts agreed that the chances were nil, in that the Supreme Court accepts less than two percent of cases which petition certiorari, and when CVSG is requested they normally follow the recommendation of the Solicitor General.  Daniel Wallach took a deep dive into the issues surrounding the case and last Friday published seven reasons why he felt the sports betting case stood a decent chance of a cert grant.

On Monday at 9:30 AM, the Supreme Court’s orders were posted on the SCOTUSblog, but no mention was made of the New Jersey case.  In short order, Wallach began analyzing the situation and concluded that it would most likely be included in the Supreme Court’s “clean-up orders list” to be published on Tuesday.  Further analysis led him to believe that the case stood an even greater chance of receiving a hearing based on his research.

Yesterday morning the announcement came:

And the news stories began to break. 

Around noon the “Dynamic Dans” sports law duo released a “breaking news” podcast diving deeply into the issues.  Highly recommended listening:

Since PASPA, the 1992 legislation which banned legal sports betting in all but four grandfathered states (and for all practical purposes – all states but Nevada) has been driven by the sports leagues, who over the last few years have seemed uneven – and often hypocritical in their gambling stance – a number of stories focused on how the leagues will likely react to the cert grant.

The sports leagues have up until now claimed that they would be “irreparably harmed” by legal sports betting, but in light of their recent actions, will the argument hold? Daniel Wallach says it’s unlikely and explains why in this three-parter from April:

Moving forward…

Great wrap-up here!

Looking ahead…

Permanent link to this article: