Court deadline set for New Jersey sports betting submissions
News on 25 Dec 2014
News on 25 Dec 2014
Confirming a schedule agreed by the warring parties, the US Third Court of Appeal has set January 14 for the state of New Jersey to submit its latest brief in the ongoing dispute over New Jersey’s attempts to legalise intrastate sports betting in defiance of the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act.
Ranged against the state in the latest round of litigation and appeals are the NCAA and four pro sports leagues
The leagues will have until February 13 to respond to New Jersey’s submission, and the state will then have an opportunity to answer their claims on February 27.
Our readers will recall that in 2013 the Third Circuit Court of Appeal ruled for the leagues in their action in lower courts against state legislation approving sports betting, but the three-judge panel vote was split 2 to 1 constitutional issues, giving New Jersey politicians some additional leverage, although the over-worked US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal.
State legislators went back to the drawing board to devise a new sports betting law, which was passed by the state legislature in June this year and was immediately vetoed by Gov. Chris Christie.
Determined state lawmakers made revisions that included the privatisation of all sports betting oversight, and this time Christie signed off on the bill, triggering further litigation by the leagues.
Judge Michael Shipp, who has consistently ruled against the state in court actions around this issue, acted on the leagues’ application by issuing a permanent injunction preventing the implementation of the New Jersey law and here we are.
In more recent events, National Basketball chief Adam Silver called on Gov. Christie to join him in abandoning confrontation with the leagues in favour of lobbying to have the PASPA changed by Congress.
Christie has rejected this appeal, saying that it made no sense for the NBA to be fighting a court action against New Jersey on the one hand and lobbying for the cause of the action to be changed by Congress on the other.
