{"id":5691,"date":"2022-03-10T09:13:51","date_gmt":"2022-03-10T17:13:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wagers.com\/staging\/4285\/?p=5691"},"modified":"2022-03-10T09:13:51","modified_gmt":"2022-03-10T17:13:51","slug":"doj-leaves-the-door-open-to-apply-the-wire-act-to-online-gambling","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wagers.com\/staging\/4285\/news\/doj-leaves-the-door-open-to-apply-the-wire-act-to-online-gambling\/","title":{"rendered":"DOJ leaves the door open to apply the Wire Act to online gambling"},"content":{"rendered":"

The gambling industry scored a decisive legal victory over the Trump administration\u2019s attempt to kneecap online gambling in the US \u00a0\u2013 at the behest of a wealthy political donor<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The New Hampshire Lottery brought the case following a 2018 Department of Justice opinion<\/a> that reversed a 2011 DOJ opinion<\/a> that concluded the Wire Act only applied to sports betting and not online casino games, poker, or lottery.<\/p>\n

But the victory wasn\u2019t absolute. The DOJ decided not to appeal the case to the Supreme Court, leaving the ambiguity of the Wire Act intact and limiting the decision to the New Hampshire Lottery and doesn\u2019t apply to other locales.<\/p>\n

One company, IGT, was hoping to put a final nail in the Wire Act coffin. Unfortunately, the DOJ has decided it wants to keep the Wire Act door open, as the Department of Justice recently filed a motion with a Rhode Island District Court to dismiss the follow-up case brought by IGT.<\/p>\n

You Have Nothing to Worry About<\/h2>\n

In its filing, IGT was seeking a declaratory judgment that the 2018 Wire Act opinion \u201cis contrary to law and that the Wire Act applies only to bets or wagers on any sporting event or contest.\u201d<\/p>\n

The DOJ asked the court to dismiss the case, citing its belief that IGT lacks standing as there is no threat of prosecution against the company.<\/p>\n

In its filing, the DOJ asserts:<\/p>\n

\u201cTo the extent that IGT implicitly seeks to extend the benefit of favorable First Circuit precedent to other jurisdictions where it engages in non-sports gambling \u2014 jurisdictions where courts have not yet decided whether the Wire Act reaches any non-sports gambling \u2014 IGT fails to establish a credible threat of prosecution even in those jurisdictions.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Taken at face value, the DOJ having no interest in prosecuting jurisdictions offering legal online gambling is good news. However, if you consider the history of the Wire Act in the era of online gambling, the DOJ\u2019s argument \u2013 that IGT has nothing to fear \u2013 doesn\u2019t exactly instill confidence.<\/p>\n

Essentially, without a Supreme Court opinion or Congress amending the Wire Act, the threat of a new administration performing another about-face remains in place.<\/p>\n

\n

I think the law is clear. The Wire Act does not apply to non-sports betting. But you are correct that iGaming may never be free from politically motivated shenanigans.<\/p>\n

— John A Pappas (@yanni_dc) June 22, 2021<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n