Supporters of online gambling suffered a crucial blow in the ongoing fight for regulation. This past Tuesday, a U.S. appeals court in Philadelphia ruled in favor of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act against the iMEGA (Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association) in a 3-0 decision. According to a few legal experts following the case, the court ruling should come as no surprise.
Joe Kelley, a Buffalo State law professor, explained that whenever you contest an act of Congress, you have an uphill battle on your hands and an incredibly long shot at winning.
Of all the arguments made, the iMEGA emphasized that the UIGEA was a violation of privacy rights outlined in the Constitution. The online gaming trade body sited two cases in which the UIGEA infringed on privacy, using Lawrence vs. Texas and Reliable Consultants Inc. vs. Earle as its examples.
However, Judge Dolores Sloviter, who had the final say on the matter, didn’t leave any assumptions in regard to the decision to dismiss the iMEGA’s claims. She firmly stated that the organization’s dependence on the aforementioned cases were misplaced and ultimately, irrelevant. According to Sloviter, both the Lawrence and Earle cases specifically involved state laws barring certain forms of consensual sex between adults in the privacy of the home. In regards to the UIGEA, she noted that even in the confinements of the home, gambling does not have the same constitutional magnitude of those individual cases.
While the court rejected all attempts and arguments by iMEGA’s high powered attorneys, there is one glaring loophole in the ruling that could give online gamblers and operators a small ray of hope. In justifying the legality of the UIGEA, the appeals court did not find anything in the legislation that makes any form of gambling in the United States illegal. Instead, the ruling verifies that similar to the Illegal Gambling Act, the UIGEA is only in place to enforce existing gambling laws. Because there are currently no federal laws prohibiting online gambling, it can be concluded that the act only applies to online gamblers who reside in states that have laws in place against wagering over the internet.
click here to see most Popular Pages
The court applied the “reasonable man” test, a commonly used legal method asserting that the legislation could be perfectly comprehended by an individual of normal intelligence. It then went on to specifically apply the UIGEA to existing state legislation, in affirmation that the court’s interpretation of the act only holds prevalence in jurisdictions where online gambling has been deemed illegal by other laws. This essentially means that other than wagering on sports events over the internet, which is prohibited on a federal level, online gambling is legal and financial transactions should be allowed to those players in states without legislation against it.
Following announcement of the ruling, Joe Brennan Jr., iMEGA chairman, voiced that the court made it clear that online gambling is unlawful in states with existing laws in place. He also noted that there is currently only six states that have laws against online gambling, which leaves a total 44 states where it is potentially legally. Brennan declared that this isn’t a win of any sort, but a good start.
