1 00:00:00,200 --> 00:00:03,240 Speaker 1: Nevada is the only state where it's legal to bet 2 00:00:03,240 --> 00:00:06,880 Speaker 1: on individual sporting events, but that doesn't stop Americans from 3 00:00:06,880 --> 00:00:10,120 Speaker 1: placing illegal wagers elsewhere, to the tune of an estimated 4 00:00:10,160 --> 00:00:13,319 Speaker 1: one D fifty billion dollars a year. New Jersey has 5 00:00:13,320 --> 00:00:15,200 Speaker 1: been trying for years to get a piece of that market, 6 00:00:15,280 --> 00:00:18,680 Speaker 1: and it's and now it's just a Supreme Court decision away. 7 00:00:19,200 --> 00:00:21,760 Speaker 1: The Court on Tuesday agreed to consider a New Jersey 8 00:00:21,800 --> 00:00:24,920 Speaker 1: law that would legalize sports betting at casinos and race tracks. 9 00:00:25,320 --> 00:00:28,520 Speaker 1: It's a constitutional class that could have important implications for 10 00:00:28,600 --> 00:00:31,240 Speaker 1: states rights. With us to talk about the case are 11 00:00:31,280 --> 00:00:34,000 Speaker 1: two experts on sports law, Mark Edelman, who is a 12 00:00:34,080 --> 00:00:37,519 Speaker 1: lawyer and professor at the Brute College Zickland School of Business, 13 00:00:38,040 --> 00:00:42,480 Speaker 1: and Alan Milstein, a lawyer at Sherman and Silverstein. Mark, 14 00:00:42,520 --> 00:00:44,839 Speaker 1: could you just lay the groundwork for us? Why do 15 00:00:44,920 --> 00:00:47,120 Speaker 1: we live in a world where there is exactly one 16 00:00:47,200 --> 00:00:50,400 Speaker 1: state where you can place a legal wager on a 17 00:00:50,479 --> 00:00:56,560 Speaker 1: single sporting event. Well, back in the professional sports leagues 18 00:00:57,400 --> 00:01:01,840 Speaker 1: became concerned about the potential proliferation of sports gambling, so 19 00:01:01,920 --> 00:01:05,880 Speaker 1: all the leagues went together to Congress and got Congress 20 00:01:05,920 --> 00:01:09,840 Speaker 1: to pass the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, which 21 00:01:09,880 --> 00:01:13,600 Speaker 1: is known as PASPA UH. The law is intended to 22 00:01:13,720 --> 00:01:19,240 Speaker 1: prevent states from legalizing sports gambling. However, at the time 23 00:01:19,319 --> 00:01:23,039 Speaker 1: in which the law was proposed, they were already fourth 24 00:01:23,120 --> 00:01:27,119 Speaker 1: states which had some form of sports gambling within the states, 25 00:01:27,680 --> 00:01:32,600 Speaker 1: and one in particular, Nevada, had traditional sports gambling. To 26 00:01:32,760 --> 00:01:36,759 Speaker 1: try to get those fourth states on board, as well 27 00:01:36,800 --> 00:01:40,840 Speaker 1: as to try to prevent challenges from the proposed statutes, 28 00:01:41,240 --> 00:01:45,440 Speaker 1: a grandfather clause was placed in It allowed those four 29 00:01:45,640 --> 00:01:49,520 Speaker 1: states to maintain the forms of sports gambling as they 30 00:01:49,600 --> 00:01:53,800 Speaker 1: already had, and allowed New Jersey a period of time 31 00:01:53,960 --> 00:01:57,360 Speaker 1: to legalize sports gambling in its states, which would have 32 00:01:57,360 --> 00:02:01,120 Speaker 1: made New Jersey the fifth Nevertheless, New Jersey chose not 33 00:02:01,240 --> 00:02:04,280 Speaker 1: produce so within the period, which left only the four 34 00:02:04,320 --> 00:02:08,240 Speaker 1: existing states under pass, but allowed to have some form 35 00:02:08,280 --> 00:02:14,480 Speaker 1: of sports gambling. So Alan New Jersey, despite having not 36 00:02:14,680 --> 00:02:18,119 Speaker 1: taken advantage of the time period it had to get 37 00:02:18,120 --> 00:02:21,480 Speaker 1: sports to make sports gambling legal, has been trying now 38 00:02:21,560 --> 00:02:24,440 Speaker 1: for a long time to make it legal. What is 39 00:02:24,560 --> 00:02:26,600 Speaker 1: what was? What's their strategy been here? It's been a 40 00:02:26,600 --> 00:02:28,400 Speaker 1: long road for them with the courts and everything to 41 00:02:28,440 --> 00:02:30,200 Speaker 1: get to the Supreme Court in this But what what 42 00:02:30,280 --> 00:02:35,520 Speaker 1: exactly are they trying to do here? Well, they were 43 00:02:35,560 --> 00:02:37,760 Speaker 1: really trying to be too cute by half, which is 44 00:02:37,800 --> 00:02:41,880 Speaker 1: one of the problems. Uh. They first, they first passed 45 00:02:42,600 --> 00:02:50,919 Speaker 1: a statute that legalized sports gambling in certain locales like 46 00:02:51,520 --> 00:02:55,480 Speaker 1: racetracks and cassines and things like that. And when that 47 00:02:55,560 --> 00:03:01,040 Speaker 1: was struck down under PASSPA, they decided to instead of 48 00:03:02,520 --> 00:03:08,000 Speaker 1: passing a law to regulate the gambling in those places, 49 00:03:08,160 --> 00:03:12,000 Speaker 1: just said we're not going to uh, We're just going 50 00:03:12,040 --> 00:03:18,560 Speaker 1: to remove the illegal the illegality of the gambling and 51 00:03:18,600 --> 00:03:22,760 Speaker 1: with sports in those locations. The problem is that underpass 52 00:03:22,880 --> 00:03:28,399 Speaker 1: both the states aren't allowed to authorize or regulate sports gambling. 53 00:03:29,120 --> 00:03:33,480 Speaker 1: And so the Third Circuit, well two different occasions struck 54 00:03:33,520 --> 00:03:37,560 Speaker 1: down the New New Jersey law. And so mark what 55 00:03:37,760 --> 00:03:41,440 Speaker 1: is New Jersey's argument at the Supreme Court for why 56 00:03:41,640 --> 00:03:45,960 Speaker 1: notwithstanding this law, they should be allowed to legalize sports 57 00:03:46,000 --> 00:03:50,040 Speaker 1: betting all? When the Keith began about four years ago, 58 00:03:50,600 --> 00:03:54,160 Speaker 1: New Jersey through everything but the kitchen think as the 59 00:03:54,320 --> 00:03:57,960 Speaker 1: challenge if you look at the challenge per se though 60 00:03:58,000 --> 00:04:01,320 Speaker 1: at the petition for thirty are based on the New 61 00:04:01,400 --> 00:04:06,400 Speaker 1: Jersey Third Circuit Court of Appeals and bank ruling. Now, 62 00:04:06,800 --> 00:04:12,240 Speaker 1: that case focused primarily, but not exclusively, on one argument UH, 63 00:04:12,280 --> 00:04:16,320 Speaker 1: that being UH an argument that the past but statute 64 00:04:16,880 --> 00:04:24,679 Speaker 1: violated the common deering prevention in the US Constitution. In 65 00:04:24,839 --> 00:04:30,120 Speaker 1: essence and plain language, New Jersey is arguing that it 66 00:04:30,320 --> 00:04:37,080 Speaker 1: violates the Constitution to impose any statute that compels a 67 00:04:37,320 --> 00:04:41,880 Speaker 1: state to act in a particular way. And the way 68 00:04:42,000 --> 00:04:46,200 Speaker 1: New Jersey is reading past BA is that it is compelling. 69 00:04:46,279 --> 00:04:52,359 Speaker 1: It's requiring the state to regulate and disallow sports gambling 70 00:04:52,680 --> 00:04:55,880 Speaker 1: within the state. Then you get into this whole weird 71 00:04:56,040 --> 00:04:59,440 Speaker 1: question based upon what New Jersey has attempted to do 72 00:05:00,839 --> 00:05:03,719 Speaker 1: as to whether they would be allowed to have no 73 00:05:03,920 --> 00:05:09,160 Speaker 1: regulations whatsoever. But the real question is whether New Jersey's 74 00:05:09,200 --> 00:05:15,159 Speaker 1: attempts to legalized sports gambling and then regulate it in 75 00:05:15,200 --> 00:05:18,800 Speaker 1: a moderate fashion by determining who can have it and 76 00:05:18,839 --> 00:05:22,880 Speaker 1: who cannot UH. The violates passed but and if passed, 77 00:05:22,960 --> 00:05:27,400 Speaker 1: this prohibition of that would thus constitute commandeering. We're talking 78 00:05:27,440 --> 00:05:30,840 Speaker 1: about the brand new Supreme Court case. New Jersey is 79 00:05:30,880 --> 00:05:34,240 Speaker 1: asking the court to let the state legalize sports wagering. 80 00:05:34,720 --> 00:05:39,400 Speaker 1: Right now, only Nevada allows single game sports betting. Our 81 00:05:39,440 --> 00:05:43,960 Speaker 1: guests are sports law experts Mark Edelman and Alan Milstein, Um. Alan. 82 00:05:44,360 --> 00:05:49,920 Speaker 1: A minute ago, Mark was talking about New Jersey's argument that, uh, this, uh, 83 00:05:50,080 --> 00:05:54,880 Speaker 1: this federal law that requires it to to prohibit sports gambling. 84 00:05:55,560 --> 00:05:59,320 Speaker 1: Commondears the state unconstitutionally in violation of the Tenth Amendment. 85 00:05:59,520 --> 00:06:01,760 Speaker 1: The Supreme Court is only twice before said that a 86 00:06:01,880 --> 00:06:06,000 Speaker 1: law that the federal government violates the tenth Amendment by commandeering. 87 00:06:06,120 --> 00:06:09,880 Speaker 1: And those two cases involved uh. One case involved a 88 00:06:09,960 --> 00:06:12,599 Speaker 1: state having to take title to radioactive waste, in another 89 00:06:12,640 --> 00:06:17,400 Speaker 1: case involved local officials having to perform background checks. Does 90 00:06:17,440 --> 00:06:21,560 Speaker 1: this New Jersey case fit within uh those precedents? Does 91 00:06:21,600 --> 00:06:24,160 Speaker 1: New Jersey have a good argument that it's all likewise 92 00:06:24,200 --> 00:06:28,400 Speaker 1: being commandeered? Well, let me disagree with my friend Mark 93 00:06:28,560 --> 00:06:32,200 Speaker 1: Edelman about that for a second. Uh, I don't think 94 00:06:32,200 --> 00:06:34,200 Speaker 1: New Jersey has any chance at all in the common 95 00:06:34,279 --> 00:06:39,640 Speaker 1: deering claim. What they do have a chance on is 96 00:06:39,720 --> 00:06:44,799 Speaker 1: something called equal sovereignty, which is a fairly new concepts 97 00:06:44,839 --> 00:06:49,400 Speaker 1: sort of invented by Justice Roberts that essentially says that 98 00:06:49,440 --> 00:06:53,599 Speaker 1: the states have to be treated equally. Uh. You know, 99 00:06:53,640 --> 00:06:55,840 Speaker 1: but if you if you look at whether or not 100 00:06:55,920 --> 00:06:58,760 Speaker 1: this this really dumb law and that's what it is. 101 00:06:58,800 --> 00:07:04,600 Speaker 1: A dumb law is constitutional. Uh. Either argument is a 102 00:07:04,600 --> 00:07:07,720 Speaker 1: tough argument. And yet you wonder why why is the 103 00:07:07,760 --> 00:07:11,400 Speaker 1: Supreme Court taking this case? There's no split inn a circuits. 104 00:07:11,600 --> 00:07:15,200 Speaker 1: The Solicitor General said no need to take this case. 105 00:07:16,360 --> 00:07:20,640 Speaker 1: So all of that suggests, however difficult the arguments are, 106 00:07:20,760 --> 00:07:24,559 Speaker 1: all of that suggests that the Supreme Court is taking 107 00:07:24,640 --> 00:07:31,119 Speaker 1: this case because they're going to essentially declare this law debt, 108 00:07:31,320 --> 00:07:33,680 Speaker 1: which is what it should have been declared years and 109 00:07:33,800 --> 00:07:37,320 Speaker 1: years ago. Well, Mark, what do you make of that? 110 00:07:37,400 --> 00:07:39,280 Speaker 1: Why do you think that the court took this case? 111 00:07:42,000 --> 00:07:44,920 Speaker 1: You know, it's difficult to know. Of course, Let's Supreme 112 00:07:44,960 --> 00:07:49,040 Speaker 1: Court can accept they're denied study or are for any 113 00:07:49,080 --> 00:07:52,040 Speaker 1: reason or no reason at all, and they take less 114 00:07:52,040 --> 00:07:54,520 Speaker 1: than five percent of all cases that have brought to it. 115 00:07:55,680 --> 00:07:59,200 Speaker 1: One thing I've noted that the case comes from the 116 00:07:59,240 --> 00:08:02,360 Speaker 1: state of new er The state is appointed, which in 117 00:08:02,400 --> 00:08:05,120 Speaker 1: some ways makes the case sometimes seem more important to 118 00:08:05,160 --> 00:08:08,360 Speaker 1: the Supreme Court than if it's just a regular private party. 119 00:08:09,320 --> 00:08:13,080 Speaker 1: Another is, while it seems to be a waste of 120 00:08:13,160 --> 00:08:17,240 Speaker 1: judicial resources, from my opinion, there are other states that 121 00:08:17,280 --> 00:08:22,520 Speaker 1: have talked about potentially attempting to legalize sports gambling and 122 00:08:22,560 --> 00:08:26,360 Speaker 1: bring similar claims. If that were to happen, it would 123 00:08:26,360 --> 00:08:30,360 Speaker 1: create a list amongst the circuits about a federal law, 124 00:08:31,040 --> 00:08:34,080 Speaker 1: uh and one that could create chaos as well. And 125 00:08:34,080 --> 00:08:37,240 Speaker 1: then starting finally, while this state shouldn't be one about 126 00:08:37,240 --> 00:08:40,360 Speaker 1: the states rights, and I presume the Supreme Court will 127 00:08:40,360 --> 00:08:44,280 Speaker 1: look at it as being about states right, we also 128 00:08:44,400 --> 00:08:48,080 Speaker 1: have very real issues of public policy here. And there's 129 00:08:48,080 --> 00:08:52,000 Speaker 1: a grand sense of irony that one can't deny that 130 00:08:52,200 --> 00:08:55,439 Speaker 1: the sports league, the very same entities that pushed for 131 00:08:55,559 --> 00:09:00,760 Speaker 1: past but in are now beginning to profit in some 132 00:09:00,840 --> 00:09:05,040 Speaker 1: cases directly from the activity of daily fantasy sports, which 133 00:09:05,080 --> 00:09:08,480 Speaker 1: in some ways is very similar to sports betting. So 134 00:09:08,520 --> 00:09:11,040 Speaker 1: it's got to create a concern as well that the 135 00:09:11,120 --> 00:09:15,000 Speaker 1: leagues are creeping closer and closer this very same activity 136 00:09:15,960 --> 00:09:18,839 Speaker 1: at the same time that purportedly have the right in 137 00:09:18,920 --> 00:09:22,240 Speaker 1: the stuff. Allen, in light of that, one thing I 138 00:09:22,520 --> 00:09:25,720 Speaker 1: don't understand is why are the leagues opposing this effort 139 00:09:25,720 --> 00:09:27,640 Speaker 1: by New Jersey. They're the ones on the other side 140 00:09:27,640 --> 00:09:29,840 Speaker 1: of the case. But as Mark said, they have been 141 00:09:30,320 --> 00:09:35,480 Speaker 1: uh gradually moving closer and closer to embracing sports gambling. Well, 142 00:09:35,520 --> 00:09:40,160 Speaker 1: not all the leagues have. The NBA certainly has essentially said, 143 00:09:40,480 --> 00:09:43,120 Speaker 1: you know, I think I think it's time to legalize 144 00:09:43,640 --> 00:09:46,840 Speaker 1: sports gambling. Look when I said this is a dumb law, 145 00:09:46,880 --> 00:09:48,600 Speaker 1: if you just look at the title of the law, 146 00:09:48,640 --> 00:09:53,800 Speaker 1: which is Professor Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, I 147 00:09:53,800 --> 00:09:59,160 Speaker 1: mean the law implies that professional and amateur athletes need 148 00:09:59,320 --> 00:10:06,000 Speaker 1: protection from legal gambling. It also implies that without that 149 00:10:06,000 --> 00:10:09,800 Speaker 1: that that the X somehow prohibits illegal gambling, which it doesn't. 150 00:10:10,760 --> 00:10:12,760 Speaker 1: I think I think the leagues have got to come 151 00:10:12,760 --> 00:10:16,679 Speaker 1: around to the point where they say, look, gambling on 152 00:10:16,920 --> 00:10:20,960 Speaker 1: sports is in every state of the Union. It's creating 153 00:10:21,040 --> 00:10:26,560 Speaker 1: billions of dollars, and we're all better off if sports 154 00:10:26,559 --> 00:10:30,800 Speaker 1: gambling is regulated, then if it's under the table, and 155 00:10:30,880 --> 00:10:34,160 Speaker 1: I think that's what the Supreme Court ultimately is going 156 00:10:34,240 --> 00:10:38,040 Speaker 1: to essentially try to find if they can, if they 157 00:10:38,040 --> 00:10:43,560 Speaker 1: can figure out the PEG to put their arguments in Mark, 158 00:10:43,600 --> 00:10:45,960 Speaker 1: we only have about thirty seconds, but quickly, um, if 159 00:10:46,000 --> 00:10:47,640 Speaker 1: if New Jersey wins this case, are we going to 160 00:10:47,720 --> 00:10:52,920 Speaker 1: see legal sports gambling around the country? Not necessarily. If 161 00:10:52,960 --> 00:10:56,439 Speaker 1: New Jersey wins that cake, we will see many states 162 00:10:56,520 --> 00:11:01,040 Speaker 1: legalized sports gambling. But we still have a religious lobby 163 00:11:01,080 --> 00:11:05,120 Speaker 1: and certain states, and a strong consumer protectionist movement in 164 00:11:05,200 --> 00:11:08,120 Speaker 1: some states. There will be certain states which are very 165 00:11:08,200 --> 00:11:11,760 Speaker 1: strict on gambling and other forms which may continue to 166 00:11:11,960 --> 00:11:14,760 Speaker 1: disallow sports gambling. Okay, I want to thank our guests. 167 00:11:14,760 --> 00:11:17,720 Speaker 1: That was Mark Edelman, professor at the brew College Sickland 168 00:11:17,760 --> 00:11:20,160 Speaker 1: School of Business, and Alan mill Stain, the lawyer at 169 00:11:20,200 --> 00:11:23,640 Speaker 1: Sherman Silverstein, talking about the new Supreme Court case