New Jersey’s decadelong drive to legalize sports betting seems positioned to score a win at the Supreme Court, judging by the comments of justices at arguments Monday that were closely watched by sports leagues and the multibillion-dollar gambling industry.
A majority of the court appeared receptive to the state’s claims that a 1992 law passed by Congress at the urging of then-Sen. Bill Bradley (D-N.J.) was unconstitutional because of how it interferes with the ability of states to pass legislation in the area.
Justice Stephen Breyer, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton, joined with most of the court’s Republican appointees in expressing concern that the way Congress structured the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act violated the Constitution’s principle of federalism, which reserves to the states most powers unless Congress clearly steps in to regulate an area.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was appointed by former President Ronald Reagan and is a frequent swing vote on the court, said: “This blurs political accountability because the citizen doesn’t know if it is the state government or the federal government” banning sports betting. “This is precisely what federalism is designed to prevent.”
Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized the distinction, saying, “It goes to the fundamental powers and prerogatives of the state to function their own government.”
Breyer said the gambling ban was troubling because it seemed different from the ways the federal government usually regulates.