• Washington State Court Upholds State Gambling Ban

    27 September 2010

    Newspaper

    Lee Rousso, is an avid online poker player, the Poker Players Alliance Washington State’s Director, a lawyer and is fighting the online gambling ban in Washington State through the court system.  His central argument against the internet gambling ban is,

    “The central argument is that Washington State’s statute that bans internet poker is protectionist in nature. It protects in-state businesses from out of state competition. The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution doesn’t allow that. I think it’s clear that online poker is international commerce, which means that the states can’t regulate it.”

    Friday the Washington state high court ruled against Rousso and unanimously claimed that the ban in internet gambling has in no way violated the U.S. Constitution.  Rousso and his supporters now plan on taking this to the U.S. Supreme Court if possible.

    Justice Richard B. Sanders who wrote for the court said “balanced public policy concerns and determined the interests of Washington are best served by banning Internet gambling.” It was also noted by Sanders that the court’s ruling was not an endorsement of the ban, but just an endorsement of the Washington’s legislature to do it.

    According to the court’s opinion,

    “The Legislature chose the advantages and disadvantages of a ban over the advantages and disadvantages of regulation.  The evidence is not conclusive. Many may disagree with the outcome. But the court has no authority to replace the Legislature’s choice with its own.”

    Lee Rousso expressed his disappointment through a statement issued from the Poker Players Alliance:

    “Unfortunately, the court has upheld an unpopular prohibition.  Poker players in this state need to make their voices heard. Now more than ever we need to rally together to fight this outrageous law. I hope the poker community will stand with me as I appeal this decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

    Now, we wait to see if the Supreme Court will hear the case.

    Related News

    • 01 February 2017

      US Attorney General Pick Sessions May "Revisit" Online Gambling

      One of the most important pieces of legalese that has come down in the United States for online gambling in the United States was a 2011 opinion about the Wire Act of 1961. The Wire Act was previously used as evidence that online gambling is illegal in the United States (and is the other major US law affecting online gambling from the UIGEA).

      Read full article
    • 16 November 2015

      New York Supreme Court Lawsuits for DFS Juggernauts

      Daily fantasy sports hasn't been doing so well over the past couple of months. After a scandal broke loose when a DraftKings employee used insider information to pull about $300,000 in winnings from FanDuel, they have been under fire from virtually every direction. After New York Attorney General Eric Sniederman pressed a cease-and-desist order on them, they have struck back with individual lawsuits in the Supreme Court of the state of New York. The Legality of Daily Fantasy Sports

      Read full article
    • 30 October 2015

      Big Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling Self-Embarrassment

      Sometimes it's easy to poke fun at your political opponents over things that don't really matter all that much. However, in the case of the RAWA (Restoration of America's Wire Act) bill being considered in Congress right now, anti-online gambling group Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling, or CSIG for short, completely and totally embarrassed themselves by launching a full-on assault against the English language in a press release full of errors. Pushing the RAWA Bill

      Read full article