The Washington Times discusses the Supreme Court's hearing of oral arguments in Christie v. NCAA with Michelle Minton.
The Supreme Court on Monday appeared skeptical of a 1992 federal law outlawing state-sponsored sports betting in nearly all 50 states, suggesting Congress violated states’ rights in the highly anticipated case that could quickly unleash bookmaking of professional sports in New Jersey and as many as 30 other states in the next five years.
New Jersey argued that the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, which Congress enacted to preserve the wholesome nature of sporting events, encroached on the state’s power under the 10th Amendment to institute a policy that was passed by its state legislature and directly approved by voters in a 2014 referendum.
The state has repealed its own ban on sports betting but has been repeatedly rebuffed by courts citing the federal law in its bid to allow betting on sporting events, even if only at the state’s racetracks and casinos.
Roughly 20 states are backing New Jersey, and Michelle Minton, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said they want to have the choice whether to tap into the black market that already exists.
“It’s a job creator, a tax creator,” said Ms. Minton. “They will have an opportunity to regulate this market that already exists.”
Read the full article at The Washington Times.