As we reported earlier on SbB, Delaware is set to legalize sports betting by the start of football season. Well, consider the floodgates officially open. A New Jersey lawmaker is suing the federal government to overturn it’s ban on sports wagering.
After a study that predicted a $10-billion-a-year business that could add $100 million annually to New Jersey’s coffers, it was a no-brainer for the financially strapped state. But the ban wouldn’t just affect the Garden State; it would allow every state to decide whether to legalize it. So this might be one Supreme Court case you’ll be able to eagerly follow on ESPN’s Bottom Line.
What are the odds of Jersey having a case? It’s not a bad bet, actually.
Four states are exempt from the federal ban on betting, due to being grandfathered in when the law went into effect in 1992. To State Senator Ray Lesniak (D-Union), that’s “blatant discrimination” toward some states and not others. From a layman’s perspective, that’s obvious. But how about from a legal standpoint?
Jeffrey Standen, a professor of sports law and gaming at Willamette University in Salem, Ore., said Lesniak’s case made some good points.
“There’s some pretty strong arguments to make that this law is unconstitutional,” Standen said. “Arguably, it’s an intrusion into state sovereignty.”
The benefits are obvious. Gambling is going on right now, but the states are missing out on being able to tax it. But there could be a big downside.
Notice how three of the four exempt states - Nevada, Montana, and Delaware - have no major league sports teams. (Oregon, the fourth state, has the Portland Blazers.) That’s not a coincidence. David Stern has said Las Vegas will never get an NBA franchise as long as gamblers can bet on the team’s games. The NCAA refused to hold any tournament games in Oregon, which led the state to effectively end sports betting. Portland hosted the first two rounds of the tourney this year.
What’s this mean for you, the fan and degenerate gambler? If you’ve already got a team, it’s highly unlikely you’re about to get legalized gambling, at least not in a very watered-down form. If you’re from a state or city that’s a candidate for a team, you’ll likely have a tough choice to make at the polls. Hartford, would you rather have an NHL team back or a sports book? Northern Virginia, which do you want more: to be able to bet on baseball games, or a team of your own to root for?
This is one case that will tax fans as much as constitutional scholars.
7:49 pm on March 24th, 2009
The other side of that argument is that if the law gets overturned and several states with teams pass gambling laws, like NJ, then the leagues won't be able to strong arm them anymore. NJ is not going to lose the Devils, Giants and Jets because of gambling, and New York will jump on this as fast as Jersey will if it becomes legal. You think David Stern is going to try to move the Knicks and Nets if NY and NJ get sports betting? At that point, he'd have no choice but to quit his whining and just accept that gambling is part of the game. With no gambling, these sports would ALL suffer, no exceptions.
There's too much money at stake for these states that if it becomes legal, it's more important than the teams. Worst case scenario, you can't bet on in-state teams in that state's sports books — just like you can't bet on the Kings at the Palms or the Celtics at any Harrah's casinos. There's always a way to make everyone happy.