Fansided

5 things to know about the Supreme Court sports betting ruling

By Derek Helling

Stacks of $1 dollar notes bearing the name of U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin move through a machine at the U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Wednesday, Nov. 15, 2017. A change in the Senate tax-overhaul plan that would expand a temporary income-tax break for partnerships, limited liability companies and other so-called "pass-through" businesses won the endorsement of a national small-business group today. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Stacks of $1 dollar notes bearing the name of U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin move through a machine at the U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Wednesday, Nov. 15, 2017. A change in the Senate tax-overhaul plan that would expand a temporary income-tax break for partnerships, limited liability companies and other so-called "pass-through" businesses won the endorsement of a national small-business group today. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images /
facebooktwitterreddit

The Supreme Court of the United States has issued its opinion in Murphy vs. NCAA, and the result is a sweeping victory for those interested in placing bets on single sporting events.

On Monday, May 14 the United States Supreme Court issued a 7-2 decision in favor of the defendants in Murphy v. NCAA, reversing the earlier decision by the federal Third Circuit Court of appeals. Reading deeper into the majority opinion reveals that this is a major victory for legalized sports betting not just in the state of New Jersey, where this suit began, but all across the nation.

Here are five things that sports fans all across the United States should know about what this decision means for them.

1. This decision is the result of years of litigation.

This could be considered an ultimate legal “comeback story.” At every opportunity prior to getting heard before and now granted victory by the Supreme Court, Murphy had lost.

The suit was originally named for former New Jersey governor Chris Christie, who was in office in 2014 when the state legislature and New Jersey’s voters enacted a constitutional amendment which legalized and regulated sports betting in the state. That was just the beginning of the matter, however.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and the four major professional sports leagues in the United States (Major League Baseball, the National Basketball Association, the National Football League and the National Hockey League) all quickly filed suit against Gov. Christie. They argued that the law harmed their business interests by compromising the integrity of their primary product, which is sporting events. They also argued that the law violates a federal statute, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 (PASPA).

Over the following five years, courts at every level of the federal structure found for the plaintiffs. Eventually the suit was renamed for New Jersey’s new governor, Dale Murphy. The only hope left for New Jersey’s sports betting law was for the Supreme Court to take up the case, which it did in June of 2017. In December of 2017, the court heard oral arguments. That brings the proceedings up to today, when a ruling was issued effectively granting Gov. Murphy and New Jersey the ultimate victory.

2. The ruling means New Jersey’s constitutional amendment immediately goes into effect.

This ruling states that the effect of PASPA amounts to unconstitutional commandeering (the federal government overreaching its power and interfering in matters which should be left up to individual states) and is therefore unconstitutional itself. That was the major obstacle preventing New Jersey from beginning to administer its already-enacted sports betting law. It is immediately free to begin doing that.

Casinos and racetracks in the state can begin applying for licenses to offer customers wagers on sporting events. As soon as fees are paid and paperwork processed, interested individuals can begin placing bets at those venues without any concern of violating federal or state law.

By declaring PASPA unconstitutional this ruling reaches far beyond just New Jersey, however.

3. Other states are now free to enact legislation on the subject of sports betting.

PASPA had acted as one of the obstacles to legal sports betting in most of the United States as well as New Jersey. Delaware, Montana, Nevada and Oregon were the only four states given exemptions to PASPA.

Three other states have followed New Jersey’s example and enacted laws which provide for the regulation of legal sports betting upon the event that PASPA was thrown out. As that has now happened thanks to the Supreme Court, laws in those states are now ready to take effect as well. Those states are Connecticut, Mississippi and Pennsylvania.

Many other states are currently in different stages of the legislative process to regulate sports betting within their borders. Those states are California, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina and West Virginia. There are also study bills (action taken by legislators to examine what the effects of an actual bill would be) on sports betting in Hawaii and Massachusetts.

4. Citizens outside of the few states which have already enacted sports betting laws shouldn’t assume there are no legal hurdles to betting on sports now.

The other 25 states which haven’t already been mentioned either have no laws on the books regarding sports betting and have as of yet taken no action on the matter or have their own laws banning wagering on sporting events. Citizens wishing to place bets and parties seeking to operate sports books in these states should check with their local law enforcement to ensure that they are not violating any local or state statutes by doing so.

5. Sports betting is likely to be regulated and taxed by all state governments who enact laws on the matter.

One of the primary motivations for state governments to legalize sports betting is that it may represent a tremendous source of new revenue for state governments in the form of taxes levied upon the activity.

Those taxes are likely to be levied upon the sports books who set the odds and take bets, not those individuals placing bets directly. Fans who want to place wagers on games shouldn’t anticipate having to pay a tax when they put down their money.

There has also been a lot of discussion in state legislatures about “integrity” or “rights” fees which may be paid to the professional sports leagues whose games will be wagered upon. Again, any such fees will be paid by sports books, not individual bettors directly.

As far as other possible regulations go, individual states’ frameworks for sports betting might include provisions that require sports books to share bettors’ account information with the leagues whose games are wagered upon for integrity monitoring purposes. Fans who wish to stay abreast of those developments should contact their state legislators’ offices and assembly websites.

Next: Each State's Nominee for America's Team

While the Supreme Court’s role in the matter of sports betting appears to be concluded, at least as far as Murphy vs. NCAA goes, the real drama over what the framework of sports betting in each state between stakeholders like casinos, professional sports leagues, Native American tribes and sports books now begins.