The Feds have incentives not to go after weed at the moment.

this is only a matter of time . . . picture if you will, 2017. Four years worth of retail sales of MJ in WA, you've made a nice living, bought nice cars, a big home. A Republican is elected POTUS, his Attorney General doesn't like weed, Federal Cases are brought against those WA retailers, who have been in violation of Federal law all along, and now all of their possessions can be seized as fruits of criminal enterprise.

The number of states will grow by then, not to mention the GOP is shifting on MJ. Generating revenue without raising taxes will beat out morality going forward. Louisiana is considering and with likely implement online gaming next year. 2 years ago, I would have laughed at the possibility of it even being brought up.

Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway
Don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There's a battle outside
And it is ragin'
It'll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'.

Didn't Holder at one time work for the NFL?? Perhaps he still does.

The sports leagues lobby congress.

Yes.

Holder was a natural choice to lead the effort. He served as deputy attorney general in the Clinton administration and then became a partner in Covington & Burling, a powerful Washington law firm that has long represented the NFL. For seven years, Holder helped the NFL through a number of difficulties, including an investigation of the dog-fighting charges against Michael Vick, the implementation of the Rooney Rule that requires owners to interview minority candidates for head coach vacancies, and the league's personal conduct crackdown.

Griffin Finan ‏@G_Finan

Last term the Supreme Court reversed or vacated 5 of the 6 appeals from the Third Circuit

Before a case goes for decision, cert must be granted, meaning the Court must accept it. Griffin's firm is well known for aggressive advocacy in gaming matters, but I doubt that 5 of 6 statistic reflects all appeals filed from the Third Circuit.

However, I think the 2-1 decision has good shot on cert. if this Supreme Court is interested in issues of federalism and States' Rights, and do expect NJ to seek review.

A Congressional power to tell States they cannot regulate a traditional State subject, yet allow some States to do so, is a tough policy to find support for in the Constitution. Congress can prohibit sports betting, but choosing among States and picking who can regulate it for their State seems something different somehow.

Appeals court rejects NJ sports betting law, upholds ban [northjersey.com]

“It’s a fundamental issue of fairness, and Governor Christie will not give up this fight,” the spokesman, Colin Reed, said. He said the dissenting judge in the 2-1 opinion agrees with New Jersey’s central argument — that the federal law is unconstitutional because it “prevents sports betting in New Jersey against the wishes of its own elected officials and citizens.”

Notice that the team in Question is the Jacksonville Jaguars.
Duly noted by the NFL in between lulz,
and several equipment staff were quietly banned for life...

NJ horsemen file appeal to full Third Circuit court in sports betting case, signal Governor Christie approval

It is worth pointing out that the Supreme Court solidified the notion of equal protection for states in their (horrendous) Voting Rights Act ruling, so that increases NJs chances significantly.

Third Circuit Denies Rehearing in N.J. Sports Betting Case -- Projecting the Likely Arguments Before the Supreme Court [kozongaming.blogspot.com]

...

Important Question of Federal Law Not Settled by Supreme Court [bingo!] -- "a state court or a United States court of appeals has decided an important question of federal law that has not been, but should be, settled by this Court, or has decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with relevant decisions of this Court."

This third category raises several interesting possibilities for New Jersey...

Oklahoma State playing Colorado (NCAA basketball) in the MGM Grand right now. LOL NCAA.

Of the 33 players on the rosters, 19 were under the age of 21.

This is the start of a three year contract to have games at the MGM Grand [cubuffs.com]:

bd Global, LLC, a Lexington, Ky.-based sports marketing firm, has signed an exclusive three-year contract with MGM Grand to provide college basketball content. The Showcase is the first of several new regular season college basketball events at MGM Grand over the next few seasons.

Scroll down to the bottom of the page to read quotes at the press conference from four coaches proclaiming how excited/happy they are to be in Las Vegas.

In 2012, the resort played host to the Holiday Hoops Classic and this past March partnered with the Pac-12 Conference to become its new home for the annual Pac-12 Men’s Basketball Tournament.

This is the same league that canceled tournaments in New Jersey after the state passed sports betting legislation.

New Jersey state law on wagering forces championship relocation [ncaa.com]

The NCAA has been forced to relocate several championships from New Jersey because of a new state law now in effect allowing sports wagering on professional and collegiate games.

The six championships, all scheduled in 2013, include the Division III Wrestling Championships, East Regionals (Ewing, March 2), Division I Men’s and Women’s Swimming and Diving Championships, Diving Regionals (Piscataway, March 14-17), Division I Women’s Basketball Championship, Trenton Regional (Trenton, March 30-April 2), Division III Men’s Volleyball Championship (Hoboken, April 26-28) and the Division II and III Women’s Lacrosse Championships (Montclair, May 18-19). All six championships will be moved to new host sites and cities, to be determined at a later time.

I assume Nevada doesn't allow betting on college games that take place in state. That and the fact the league allows regular tournaments but not championship tournaments, is how the NCAA thinks they're getting around this rank hypocrisy:

The NCAA championships sports wagering policy strictly prohibits the conducting of any championship session in a state with legal wagering that is based on single-game betting. Single-game betting is defined as wagering that involves either a money line or point spread wager. This policy is in place to ensure the integrity of the game, provide consistency in awarding NCAA championships and to address concerns for student-athlete well-being.

Frigging unreal.

I think you may assume incorrectly .... my recollection was that then-GCB Chairman, and now Governor/possible 2016 VP material, Brian Sandoval was instrumental in getting the instate college game ban lifted in 2002:

"Despite an invitation, no one from the NCAA took part in any of the five Gaming Commission hearings since the measures were first proposed in October.
"I want to make it clear these proposals have not been developed to appease the NCAA," Chairman Brian Sandoval said. "Their real issue is illegal sports book betting outside the state of Nevada."
Sandoval said the changes, which were approved unanimously, give the commission better control over college sports betting in Nevada.
The Gaming Commission's new rules mean that for the first time since the 1950s betting will be allowed on games played by UNLV and the University of Nevada, Reno, and on games played by other college teams in Nevada.
"So, you'll now be able to take bets on teams if the Final Four were to play here?" asked John Yeatts, a Las Vegas resident and self-described "gambler on the carpet" who stepped to the podium to hail the Gaming Control Commission action.
"Yes," Sandoval answered"

http://espn.go.com/abcsports/bcs/s/2...6/1041823.html

I am not giving a professional opinion as to the current state of the law here, as I did not review current NV regs. Just going on memory.

However, you are right about the NCAA language quoted above .... their policy appears limited to college championship "sessions" and locations. .... Sort of like tournaments v. regular season games, perhaps ? Makes little sense since you legally can certainly bet on single games in a tournament format.

Supreme Court rejects New Jersey appeal.

USA#1 still rigged. Ray Lesniak still a boss.

Here's a statement from congressmen LoBiondo and Pallone: http://lobiondo.house.gov/press-rele...rsey%E2%80%99s

http://www.njbiz.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...late=mobileart

Your move Christie.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using 2+2 Forums

Resign

As far as Christie is concerned, this story is over.

Christie vetoes bill that would have allowed sports betting at N.J. casinos, race tracks

From Inside the Chris Christie New Jersey Sports Betting Veto

Not really a Christie fan, but this is what he was supposed to do. NJ took their shot in court - they lost - game over.

Why do you think he was "supposed to" veto the bill? So the legislature was "not supposed to" pass the bill, especially not 90% in favor?

State government flunkies think they can do whatever they want - not in touch with reality.

The Federal government has decided, with the "input" of major league and professional sports, there will be no sports betting.

From NY Daily News:

Awesome.