Clicky

Anti-Internet Gambling Group Wades into Wire Act Case with Faulty Argument - PennsylvaniaCasinos.com News : PennsylvaniaCasinos.com News
  • 91 views
  • 3 minutes read
dissapointed
Published on
Update on
Author

The new reinterpretation of the 1961 Wire Act that was delivered by the United States Department of Justice at the beginning of the year has caused quite stir in states with online gaming industries and those that have been considering the interactive gaming laws. Now, as the legal battle between the State of New Hampshire and the Department of Justice over the interpretation continues to rage on, it is becoming clearer that the much of the argument hinges on the semantics and grammar. This present a rather odd situation where the United States First Circuit Court attempts to decipher the original intent of the author of the law which was written way back in 1961.

According to Judge Paula Barbadoro, one of the people presiding over the case, the disputed opening passage of the Wire Act is “a mess of a statute”. He further noted that sometimes the people who author laws are, without a doubt, “imperfect grammarians”.

 The Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling’s (CSIG) Two Cents

Earlier this week, the Sheldon Adelson—backed Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling (CSIG) gave its take on the semantics debate. The anti-interactive gaming lobbyist group gave a definition of the term “whoever” that, in so many ways, defies hundreds of years of legal precedent. The controversial opening paragraph that is causing all this debate reads as follows:

Whoever being engaged in the business of betting or wagering knowingly uses a wire communication facility for the transmission in interstate or foreign commerce of bets or wagers or information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers on any sporting event or contest, or for the transmission of a wire communication which entitles the recipient to receive money or credit as a result of bets or wagers, or for information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

According to the Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling (CSIG), “whoever” refers to everyone and everything – this includes all the governments, and all the states, as well as private persons and entities. The group is clearly attempting to demonstrate that the states are breaking the law by offering online gambling. However, they definitely did not do their homework before making the very bizarre statement that breaks with legal tradition. Since time immemorial “whoever” has never referred to government entities. This is why lawsuits filed against government entities always name prominent individuals associated with the that given government entity.

Perhaps it is time for Sheldon Adelson and his band of lobbyists return to the drawing board so that they can furnish up a more relevant argument.

Editor's Picks

Online Gambling Finally Takes Off in Pennsylvania

Following several months of rigorous product testing by the Pennsylvanian Gaming Control Board (PGCB), three of the Keystone State’s licensed casino operators have recently begun offering their online gaming products to the state’s residents. Pennsylvania will now be finally joining the small list of states where online casino-style gaming is fully legalized and regulated. Penn […]

Pa. Casinos Lose Lawsuit Against Online Lottery Games

A while back, a coalition of seven casinos in Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction to stop the Pennsylvania Lottery from offerings online casino-style games. Last Friday, the casinos were dealt a huge blow when a Commonwealth Court chose to side with the lottery. The Pennsylvania Lottery officially launched its online lottery product in […]

PGCB To Hold Casino License Auction in September

On Wednesday, July 10, the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) voted in favor of a plan to recommence the Category 4 satellite casino auction process. As such, the state will try again to award gaming licenses for five more satellite casinos as part of the ongoing aggressive gambling expansion that kicked off in October 2017. […]

Similar Stories in Gambling

Pa. Casinos Lose Lawsuit Against Online Lottery Games

A while back, a coalition of seven casinos in Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction to stop the Pennsylvania Lottery from offerings online casino-style games. Last Friday, the casinos were dealt a huge blow when a Commonwealth Court chose to side with the lottery. The Pennsylvania Lottery officially launched its online lottery product in […]

High Hopes as DraftKings Acquisition of SBTech Nears

DraftKings, one of the most popular gaming operators in the United State is currently on the verge of completing its bid to acquire online gambling and sports betting company SBTech. The announcement of the acquisition plans came just a week after SBTech had appointed a new president for its operation in the United States. This […]

Congress Reportedly Planning to Defund DOJ Wire Act Opinion

Just a little over two weeks after a federal court ruled against its recent reinterpretation of the 1961 Wire Act, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has suffered yet another potential blow. This is because Congress has taken a keen interest in fighting against the recently-published Wire Act opinion that was set to effectively […]

Federal Court Delivers Decision on the 1961 Wire Act Case

Last Monday, the state of New Hampshire won the legal challenge against the US Department of Justice’s revises opinion of the 1961 Wire Act. Paul Barbadoro, the federal judge who presided over the case, ruled that the Wire Act applies only to sports betting and not all forms of online gambling as stipulated by the […]