Interesting legal arguments emerge on New Jersey sports betting

Legal arguments triggered by the major sports leagues’ attempts to sue the state of New Jersey over its new law allowing intrastate single game sports betting warmed up this week as New Jersey’s Washington DC lawyers fired back.

The Press of Atlantic City reports that New Jersey’s legal representatives presented interesting argument that:

* The NFL, NBA, NHL and MLB and the NCAA do not have standing to sue New Jersey because they cannot show that the state offering sports betting currently banned by the PASPA will cause them any harm.

* Despite a market estimated at around $380 billion annually, the leagues have managed to maintain their integrity; therefore it is unlikely that this will be further placed at risk by New Jersey operations, even if these generate an amount similar to the $3 billion delivered by Nevada sports betting annually.

* The sports leagues have enjoyed significant growth over the last twenty years, much of it thanks to the sports betting industry. Given the existing levels of sports betting, the temptation to fix games is already present. If any fixing went on, it would be the leagues’ own players, officials and employees who were involved – not the New Jersey regulators.

* On an interesting constitutional point, the leagues’ contention that the federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection. Act (PASPA) has a specific clause allowing sports leagues to sue is challenged. New Jersey’s lawyers argue that the insertion of such a clause implies that federal lawmakers overreached their authority and usurped the constitutional functions of the judiciary, because granting such standing to sue is a power restricted to the judiciary by the constitution.

Related and similar