By
Steve Kallas (posted by Rick Morris)
While
much can and will be written on New Jersey’s recent attempt to allow sports
betting at Monmouth Park, there are two fascinating things to look at in the
specifics of the present case (a federal judge granted a temporary restraining
order (“TRO”) last Friday barring Monmouth from taking any sports bets) and the
history of the federal law at issue in the present case.
WHERE’S
THE IRREPARABLE HARM?
While
there are four things a movant must show to get a TRO, we will focus on the
main two: irreparable harm (in this
case, to the NFL and the other leagues) and likelihood of success on the merits
of the case. A federal judge, in this
case Judge Michael Shipp, read his decision from the bench last Friday,
stopping Monmouth Park from accepting bets on sports this past Sunday.
In
discussing his decision that the NFL and other movants would be irreparably harmed
if you bet $50 to win on the Patriots this past Sunday, Judge Shipp said: “More
legal gambling leads to more total gambling, which in turn leads to an
increased incentive to fix plaintiffs’ matches.”
To
say this cheapens the meaning of “irreparable harm” would be an
understatement. According to papers
filed in New Jersey federal courts over the last few years, sports betting is a
$500 billion (yes, with a b) per year industry, most of it bet illegally. In New Jersey, let’s assume the annual illegal
betting is in the neighborhood of one billion per year (you can put in any
number you want here from hundreds of millions of dollars to a few billion).
The
point here is that, even if 10 or 20 billion dollars a year would be bet
legally in New Jersey (and remember, the New Jersey gambling at Monmouth did
not allow any wagers on games played in New Jersey and limited wagers to $100),
that would be a drop in the bucket compared to what is already wagered.
We’ve
already had the Tim Donaghy affair in the NBA and a number of betting scandals
in the NCAA. Did this have anything to
do with legal (as opposed to illegal) gambling?
Of course not. The leagues police
this stuff and warn their players about it every year. If anything, the concept is backwards. The legislatures and the courts should be more
worried about illegal gambling rather than the spread of legal gambling.
Maybe
the judge doesn’t understand how involved the NFL is with gambling (maybe with
a wink and a nod, but involved nonetheless).
Sometimes, judges just don’t quite understand the industry before
them. For example, why is the NFL injury
report so important, so regulated, so needs-to-be-true,, according to the
NFL? Well, if you understand the
business, you understand that the weekly injury report is gold to gamblers,
legal and illegal.
There
is certainly no evidence to show that, if there were more (legal) gambling on
top of illegal gambling, it would cause more “incentive” to fix games.
Maybe
the judge also doesn’t understand that legal gambling won’t attract the big
bettors anyway. You see, the state of
New Jersey isn’t going to give you credit when you go to bet at Monmouth. Your local bookie, if you know one, will
absolutely (in most instances) give you credit.
Of course, you’d better pay if you lose.
There
are an awful lot of under-the-radar things when it comes to sports gambling.
Frankly,
the notion that legal gambling would lead to more fixes is preposterous. It’s just a made-up reason to stop legal
gambling in New Jersey. Again, can anyone really say, with any certainty, that,
if sports gambling increases from $500 billion to $600 billion (or any number
you want to fill in here), more games will be fixed?
Of
course not. And we won’t even discuss
the behemoth that is fantasy football, that is played “for fun” and, yes, for
money (and plenty of it). But we will
discuss one more irreparable harm aspect below under New Jersey’s colossal
blunder.
WHAT
ABOUT LIKELIHOOD OF SUCCESS ON THE MERITS?
While
it didn’t seem to be addressed, at least by news reports of Judge Shipp’s oral
decision, this judge also had to find that the NFL and the other leagues are
going to prevail at trial on these issues (in order to grant the TRO). That’s a very bad sign for New Jersey
(although the loser of this case will appeal to the Third Circuit, where, it
says here, New Jersey has a better chance to win).
As
you may know, Judge Shipp had ruled against New Jersey a few years ago and his
ruling was affirmed by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. But there was language in the higher court’s
opinion that gave New Jersey hope that it could have legal sports betting in
New Jersey.
It
is unclear as to why Judge Shipp believes that the NFL and the other leagues
will win this case on the merits. Presumably,
it is that sports betting in New Jersey still runs afoul of The Professional
and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 (“PAPSA”). This act, essentially, bars state-involved
gambling.
So
you have a federal judge who has ruled against the state of New Jersey in the
past, who has come up with, to be kind, weak irreparable harm, who doesn’t
quite understand the realities of the gambling business and who has, either
explicitly or implicitly, decided that the NFL and the other leagues will win
this case on the merits.
NEW
JERSEY’S COLOSSAL BLUNDER?
Lost
in the shuffle, while discussing this case, is that the State of New Jersey had
the right to institute legal gambling in New Jersey and chose not to do
it.
How
could that be?
Well,
when PAPSA was passed, there were three exceptions to the anti-gambling
statute. One, of course, was for Nevada,
apparently so as not to destroy their economy.
Another was for other states (like Delaware and Oregon) which are
allowed to take lottery-type bets (only Nevada can take single-game bets).
But
the third, which is section 3704(a)(3) of PAPSA, specifically allowed the state
of New Jersey to license sports wagering in Atlantic City within one year of
PAPSA’s enactment.
Obviously,
New Jersey decided not to do it then.
But, equally obviously, they want to do it now.
h
Did
New Jersey “drop the ball?”
Draw
your own conclusions.
To
add one more factor to the erroneous (it says here) irreparable harm finding,
how is it that something (sports wagering in New Jersey) which was specifically
going to be allowed as legal in 1992, somehow become a basis for irreparable
harm in 2014?
Again,
it simply makes no sense.
CONCLUSION
The
conclusion is legal sports betting is coming to places other than Nevada. The only question is when, not if.
Indeed,
the bigger question is whether Congress will repeal PAPSA and allow any and all
states to participate in legal sports gambling.
While
New Jersey is not “sponsoring” the legal gambling they want in New Jersey, the
benefits to the state are obvious: more tax revenue, the saving and/or revival of
thousands of jobs (many already lost) in Atlantic City, the revival of
racetracks and the horse industry, which also has thousands of jobs in New
Jersey.
It
says here that, eventually, the leagues will come on board (presumably if they
get a piece of the action). NBA
Commissioner Adam Silver has already essentially said that the NBA would
consider it (he knows it’s coming).
Maybe
the court(s) should look at the legalization of marijuana in places like Colorado,
even though it seems, to some degree, to run afoul of federal law. New Jersey is trying to do a similar thing
(in fact, New Jersey is trying to comply with the law as enunciated by the
Third Circuit Court of Appeals in the prior decision on sports gambling in New
Jersey).
The
legal gambling snowball is rolling.
Eventually, like with the legalization of marijuana, each state will
make its own decision as to whether they want to have legal sports gambling or
not.
There
is no evidence that legal sports gambling, no matter what a federal judge
thinks, will lead to more potential fixes.
The heavy hitters would never bet in a state-sponsored gambling casino,
because, among other reasons, 1) they wouldn’t want their gambling habits to be
made public; and 2) they won’t be able to get credit for large amounts of money
that they already get credit for from their bookmakers.
Time
to face the realities of the situation.
The
future is now.
©
COPYRIGHT 2014 BY STEVE KALLAS ALL RIGHTS RESERVED