PGRI cited Michelle Minton on the liklihood that judges will overturn the federal sports betting ban on behalf of the state of New Jersey.
In an overlooked provision in the state’s gaming expansion bill, lawmakers took a gamble that New Jersey might win in its bid to undo the federal ban on sports betting.
The recently passed gaming expansion bill says that if the Supreme Court rules that New Jersey can offer sports betting, Pennsylvania will move to legalize sports betting as well.
The high court case isn’t the only uncertain element complicating the rollout of the gaming expansion though.
The law also allows local municipalities to notify the state that they don’t want to host one of the mini-casinos allowed by the expansion.
In the lawsuit, New Jersey is seeking to have the Supreme Court overturn the 1992 federal law that bars sports betting in all but a handful of states. Nevada, Oregon, Montana and Delaware are allowed to have legal sports betting because they had it in place before the federal ban was enacted.
Michelle Minton, who attended the Supreme Court arguments in the sports betting case, as a senior fellow with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said the justices appear to be leaning toward overturning the federal sports betting ban.
The Competitive Enterprise Institute is a libertarian think tank, based in Washington.
Minton said she left the courtroom “much more confident New Jersey will get a full win,” based on the degree of skepticism the justices displayed in listening to the arguments defending the ban.
Read the full article at PGRI.