Christie optimistic after sports betting oral hearings

The justices heard New Jersey’s case against the federal law that bans states from allowing gambling in most professional and college sports.

The Supreme Court gathered yesterday to hear New Jersey’s oral arguments over the challenge on the federal ban on sports betting. Whilst nothing has been determined yet, New Jersey’s Governor Chris Christie has showed his optimism around a possible strike of the PASPA Act that prohibits states from offering sports betting services.

Governor Christie sat in the front row of the courtroom whilst the justices in the Supreme Court discussed the case. Lawyer for New Jersey, Theodore B. Olson, said that the law was a command to the states instead of focusing on regulating sports betting. Justice Stephen G Breyer said that the federal government can make a policy determination to regulate the activity. “Once it makes that determination, it can forbid state laws inconsistent with that determination. That’s called pre-emption. But he said that the federal government cannot tell the state how to legislate.

“Nevada has sports betting, and it has it regulated. What I’m saying is, and all of the evidence supports this, that betting on sports is taking place all over the United States. Five percent of it is legal in Nevada. The rest of it is illegal. New Jersey decided we are going to look at it,” added Olson.

Moreover, the American Gaming Association (AGA) released a statement in which it was detailed that Monday was a positive day for the millions of Americans seeking to legally wager on sporting events. “While we can’t predict the intentions of Supreme Court Justices, we can accurately predict the demise of the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection of 1992 (PASPA). The justices of the Court expressed deep interest in the role of the federal government, a role that we believe has created a thriving illegal market that has driven trillions of dollars to offshore websites and corner bookies,” said AGA.

AGA added that states and tribal sovereign nations have proven to be effective regulators of gaming, and yesterday’s oral arguments before the Supreme Court moved them one giant step closer to offering a new product that Americans demand.