U.S. Supreme Court Halts Florida Sports Betting
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has issued a stay on a previous lower court ruling that gave the green light for sports betting in the Sunshine State as part of an agreement between the state and the Seminole Tribe of Florida.
The stay was issued by Chief Justice John Roberts, who oversaw the emergency request from a federal appeals court. The stay did not cite Roberts’ reason for his decision – nor did it give an inclination which way SCOTUS might rule.
A DRAWN-OUT FIGHT
The fight over sports betting in Florida originated when the State of Florida granted exclusive sports betting rights to the Seminole Tribe in 2021 – which prompted a lawsuit from betting pari-mutuels – companies that use poll betting systems.
The Seminole Gaming Compact – as it was dubbed – was designed to be a win-win for each party. The state was set to generate $6 billion in total revenue by 2030, and the tribe would have exclusive sports betting rights in the state.
However, the groups filing suit said it violated a 2018 Florida Constitutional Amendment passed by voters that stated changes to state gambling laws needed to be approved by the voters.
Additionally, West Flagler Associates argued that the compact would violate federal gambling laws since the tribe was launching a sports betting app, and bettors could theoretically make sports bets off of tribal land.
The tribe’s attorneys subsequently argued that the app’s servers would be on tribal land.
U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich ruled in November 2021: “This court cannot accept that fiction.”
SETTING UP SUPREME COURT SHOWDOWN
After a June 30, 2023 appeals court ruling struck down parts of Friedrich’s ruling, it left open the possibility that sports betting could get the go-ahead before SCOTUS ruled on other underlying legal issues including the application of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
“The circuit [appeals court] opinion raises a question of nationwide importance regarding the ability of states and tribes to use IGRA compacts to provide for gaming off Indian lands,” the request said.
The request for the stay continued by saying that if the gaming compact continued, violations of state and federal law would have occurred with each sports bet placed. “Absent a stay, the compact will give rise to hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of sports betting transactions that violate both state and federal law before this [Supreme] Court has the opportunity to address the merits,” the request said.
“The circuit opinion enables a dramatic change in public policy on legalized gaming that, once started, may be difficult to stop.”