US DOJ Back Peddles On Wire Act Opinion
Opines 1961 Wire Act is not limited to Sports Betting
The US Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) published an opinion Monday headed “Reconsidering Whether the Wire Act Applies to Non-Sports Gambling.”
The opinion puts into question the legality of any form of gambling based on a grammatical interpretation in the text of the 1961 Wire Act which industry observers note may affect the recent flurry of legalisation on intrastate online casino gaming, lottery and poker.
Sports betting would in theory remain untouched under the 2018 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned federal law prohibiting states from legalising sports betting.
The opinion, written by Steven Engel, OLC Assistant and dated November 2, 2018, in essence reverses a 2011 opinion from that same office that interpreted the 1961 Wire Act as only applying to sports betting.
The full text of the opinion can be read here.
90-Day Moratorium Before Implementation Of Legal Opinion On US Wire Act (Update)
To allow business to adjust their operations, relays DOJ
Monday’s published 23-page reinterpretation of the 1961 Wire Act, written by Steven Engel of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of Legal Council (OLC), will be implemented after a 90-day moratorium, Reuters reports.
A memo from the Department of Justice’s Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Tuesday said the 90-day moratorium will enable businesses to adjust their operations.
Engel reinterpreted the text of the 1961 Wire Act to prohibit all forms of gambling across State lines, not just sports wagering as previously determined by the DOJ in 2011.
Ray Lesniak, the former New Jersey State Senator who spearheaded New Jersey’s long fight to legalised sports betting, said the State would fight for its rights through the courts as it did before regarding sports wagering.
“Looks like I will have to go to court again to straighten out the Justice Department’s overreaching on states’ rights as I did with sports betting,” Lesniak said in an email to NJ Online Gambling.
“This opinion is outrageous. It puts state lotteries at risk and state revenues. If Congress won’t fix it, I will through the judicial process.”
Washington D.C. attorney Jeff Ifrah opines worrying about the legality of sports betting and online gaming may be premature.
“The Opinion glosses over case law precedent and largely ignores the legislative history that accompanied the Wire Act, which supports the original 2011 Memo’s take on the Wire Act’s reach being limited to sports betting,” Ifrah’s ‘On iGaming’ blog reads.
“It is worth noting that [DOJ] opinions are not binding precedent and have no immediate or discernible effect upon federal prosecutorial priorities,” Ifrah said.