I see someone lining up an offer for Revel as I type this.

http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/264...sports-betting

Would the federal governemnt be ok with this?

Sportsbetting would probably help the existing casinos plenty. Probably not enough to keep the old ones open.

If they could do it online would probably be amazing for them even with just NJ.

I doubt online would happen anytime soon. The sports leagues and lobbyists will already be all over this. Way more lobbying and interests against sports betting than poker.

Hey! NJ and AC realized they needed to do something about their not having any money problem.... 15 years later!!!!!!!

Governor Christie is playing political football with the sports betting announcement today.

He did not sign the law that the legislature had presented him.

But, by "issuing a directive" he has something to bring to the table at today's Atlantic City Summit at 2 PM. Timing is everything.

Online isn't in the cards because the objective is to drive the sports betting physically to the racetracks and especially the casinos in AC. No better place for gamblers to be after placing their picks.

The legality of it versus US Law? It will definitely be disputed right away.

The casinos and race tracks have been planning to offer this for awhile.

Would it surprise anyone that Windows to bet on this weeks college football games will be available on Tuesday with NFL games right there with them. Details can be worked out. And for the lines, all they have to do is plug in the Vegas Lines to Start.

WILL NOT HAPPEN !!!!!!!

So can people make sports bets now or is it going to get insta-challenged in court and go through a legal process for years and years?

I do think that if sports betting is challenged by the pro leagues, it has to be against the casinos and/or the racetracks. The state changed the law for sports betting to make it a "hands off" approach though.

https://twitter.com/Grange95/status/509036198099431424

Key interesting points.

This end around will fail. The Feds have 11 JJ Watts lined up on the other side of the ball waiting for NJ to make it's move.

Who would take the fall if casino/tracks offered sports betting, and then the federales decided to come in and break up the party? Would it be the casinos? The workers? The governor? The bet placers?

Which feds are you thinking could break this up? I'm not a lawyer, seriously asking.

Compare it to Colorado making pot legal. Remains illegal on a federal level, but the DEA and US AG haven't done anything. The most they can do is give banks (regulated by Fed) grief if they accept deposits from proceeds of the pot industry.

In the case of NJ, its a grey area if sports betting is even illegal on a federal level. So much of a grey area that Christie believes nobody can prove it is.

Pot growers and sellers are not major corporations. They do not have significant assets or licenses in other states that can be frozen or seized. Casino operators face large risks and no executive in his right mind would take the chances.

I wasn't comparing pot to casinos, I was comparing something made legal in a state that is obviously illegal on federal level. I still ask: Which fed authority will seize or freeze assets and licenses in this case? It isn't obvious it's illegal on a federal level.

I 100% agree casino operators won't take chances without properly vetting the situation with their attorneys. Personally I think they might be more worried about blowback from Nevada Regulators than any federal action. Although Nevada has no control over actions in NJ, they can make operating in Nevada difficult if they feel shunned.

The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 makes it a federal crime to conduct sports betting except in 4 exempted states (of which, NJ is not one). Presumably, then, it's in the domain of the FBI to enforce.

Aware of PASPA, but the entire reason this is now happening is NJ/Christie have taken the stance that PASPA is unconstitutional. NJ made it legal in their state, and contend it is illegal for PASPA to prevent it.

NJ would have been better off taking such a hard line in 1992 when the act allowed them 1 year make their case to be included in exemption.

“I can’t imagine any lawyer telling a client, ‘Go ahead and violate federal anti-organized crime statues — which are felonies.’ He’s a former US Attorney; he knows about the [Interstate] Wire Act, which is designed to fight organized crime, and the Illegal Gambling Business Act," Rose added. "Certainly, any New Jersey casino that did this would lose its license everywhere, including its assets [gained from sports betting.] So, I don’t understand what the thinking is. It’s a headline — but it’s a very weird headline. What Christie is telling the casinos to do is to violate federal law, and it’s a criminal law and the normal remedies for criminal law is to be arrested.”

“It means if you are big enough — just five or more people doing more than $2,000 a day, it turns it into a federal felony. It doesn’t matter if the state says it’s not going to enforce it, it becomes a federal offense," he said. "It’s so clearly against state law, and so clearly against the federal [Illegal Gambling Businesses] act. There are so many things that are strange about this, but this is the strangest: He’s saying, ‘Come and get my casinos, coppers.’ But the casinos are the ones going to be facing many years in prison and the loss of all their assets if they go ahead and do this."

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf...perts_say.html

Perhaps a better example of state vs federal law in this case would be on-line poker/gambling. Casinos didn't seem to mind jumping in on that when NJ and Nevada made it legal. UIGEA and Wire Act....federal laws say no, yet these two states and major casinos are taking advantage of it. California hopefully soon to follow.

I pointed you to one article where you can read what respected lawyers are saying. There are plenty more out there if you are serious about your questions and want to find answers. Of course you will also find a quotes from people who think the federal laws don't apply. Believe what you want.

This is kind of real stuff. The one who will put this forward is Monmouth Park with William Hill Book Agency. They have been in builiding all year, this morning they are acting like they could take action by this Sunday ! Key few days coming up, this is like the weed end around.....
I dont know whats going to happen here, but I can tell you with my own eyes Monmouth Park looks like the test case

A lot easier for Intra-State entities (race tracks, Borgata, Resorts) to disregard the federal act than it would be for Caeasars to do so, as they still have to answer to a gaming commission in NV that would most probably come pay their headquarters a visit.

Borgata is half owned by MGM And Boyd gaming.

Will be interesting to see who acts, who follows, and who stays away.

The U IGEA did not really criminalize playing online poker. Nothing in the bill says, "online poker is now illegal." Instead, it made it illegal to conduct banking transactions or to accept wagers over the internet to carry out activities that were illegal under any other state or federal law. Once the DOJ reinterpreted to clarify that the Wire Act did not apply to online poker sites that were opperating solely within the boundaries of one state (as long as those states properly authorized the site), then no federal law is being violated. Note that the brick and mortar casinos didn't start to offer games until the combination of the federal reinterpretation and state authorization essentially removed the risk of prosecution.

Sports betting is different because there is a specific federal law that says that only 4 states can offer sports betting, and NJ isn't one of them. Now, there are some states rights and other arguments that could be used to challenge that law, but if I were an attorney advising a brick and mortar client, I would feel much more comfortable telling them to set up online craps from a server in A.C. than I would about letting then accept in person sports wagers (especially if they were going to call their cousin Vinny in Vegas to find out the line )

As my first post said I am not an attorney. I surrender to those more knowledgable than me (which is many) with regards to specifics of federal anti gaming laws.

I still think it will be interesting to see what establishments act on this news. Will also apparently be interesting to see what actions the Feds will take.

Gary Loveman says Caesars will not participate in AC due to questions of legality. From Gambling 911.