Christopher Soriano Speaking at Mastering Fantasy Sports and Online Gaming Law CLE

Duane Morris’ Christopher Soriano will be speaking at a telephonic seminar about fantasy sports, online gaming and digital sports gambling on February 28, 2018 at 12:00 p.m.

The teleconference will discuss the latest on Mastering Fantasy Sports and Online Gaming Law. The seminar will introduce the most relevant issues and solutions along with latest legal developments and Supreme Court decisions affecting the industry.

For more information and to register, please visit the event website.

Christopher Soriano Speaking at Seton Hall Law School’s Gambling Law Symposium

Duane Morris’ Christopher Soriano will be presenting at a gambling law symposium hosted by the Seton Hall Law School’s Continuing Legal Education at Seton Hall University on March 1, 2018 at 3:30 p.m.

The symposium will discuss New Jersey’s gambling laws while focusing on the following topics:

  • The New Jersey Constitution, Statutes, Rules, and Regulations Governing Gambling
  • The Definition of Gambling Under New Jersey Law: The Chance Versus Skill Debate Involving Fantasy Platforms and Poker
  • The Impact Of Technological Advances Upon Laws Governing The Placement of Wagers On Horse races
  • Overview Of Supreme Court’s Sports Betting Case and
  • On-Line Casino and Other Forms of Gambling Under Federal and New Jersey Law

For more information and to register, please visit the event website.

Real Sports Experts and Fantasy Sports

John Brennan, a staff writer for The Record, was a panelist for Duane Morris’ event “The Future of Sports Betting” on April 27, moderated by partner Christopher Soriano. Mr. Brennan’s column today, about the notorious poor luck of professional sportswriters and sports executives at fantasy leagues in their own sports, mentioned the event, sharing a story told by panelist Andrew Brandt of ESPN. The firm thanks Mr. Brennan and Mr. Brandt for their participation in the event.

Duane Morris Hosts “High-Stakes Games: Betting on Sports” Roundtable

Duane Morris, the Sports Business and Leadership Association and the Sports Lawyers Association will be hosting the roundtable discussion, “High-Stakes Games: Betting on Sports,” on Thursday, January 26, 2017 in Miami, Florida. This in-depth roundtable discussion will focus on the key issues and high stakes of sports betting and will feature sports and gaming industry executives, lawyers and pro-team executives. Duane Morris partner Christopher L. Soriano, of the firm’s Cherry Hill office, will moderate the discussion.

Featured Speakers:

  • Eric Frank, Director, Legal Affairs, Amaya
  • Myles Pistorius, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Miami Dolphins

Topics to be discussed include:

  • The current state of sports betting in the United States
  • New developments in gaming law
  • The pro team’s view on expanding sports betting
  • Online and offshore wagering on games

Duane Morris Sports Practice AdvantageSM
Duane Morris attorneys have extensive experience representing clients doing business in sports. Whether pursuing new opportunities or investments, enforcing contracts or agreements or protecting clients’ rights, the firm’s lawyers understand the unique issues presented by operating in the industry, including the importance of establishing and maintaining relationships, controlling sensitive information, maintaining privacy and confidentiality and achieving goals in tight time frames.

About the Sports Business and Leadership Association

The Sports Business and Leadership Association (“SBLA”) is a non-profit charitable organization whose members are professionals working in the sports business industry. The SBLA’s core mission is to organize an affinity group of legal professionals working in the sports business industry and to educate them on trending sports business issues and concerns. The SBLA’s goal is to raise money to provide underprivileged children with the financial means to attend a summer sports camp at a university (the “SBLA Scholarship Program”).

About the Sports Lawyers Association

The Sports Lawyers Association (SLA) is a nonprofit, international, professional organization whose common goal is the understanding, advancement and ethical practice of sports law. There are more than 1,000 current members: practicing lawyers, law educators, law students and other professionals with an interest in law relating to professional and amateur sports.

Duane Morris Attorneys Christopher Soriano and Adam Berger to present at NJ State Bar Webinar

Duane Morris attorneys Christopher Soriano and  Adam Berger of the firm’s Cherry Hill office will present a webinar, “2016: A Year to Hold’em or Fold’em,” hosted by the NJ State Bar on December 9, 2016. The webinar will offer retrospective on this year’s key legal issues in the gaming industry.

Topics to be discussed include:

  • The recent decision shooting down sports betting in casinos
  • Impact of the North Jersey gaming referendum on the future of the racing industry and on the Atlantic City casino market
  • Online gaming developments
  • Fantasy sports legislation/regulation
  • Issues surrounding the potential closing of Monmouth Racetrack

To register for the webinar, please visit the NJSBA website.

No NJ Sports Betting – Again

Dealing another setback to New Jersey’s long running battle to implement sports betting at casinos and racetracks in the state, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals has again ruled that the state’s latest effort to implement sports betting runs afoul of the federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA).

Briefly, PASPA prohibits a state from “authorizing by law” sports betting.   New Jersey previously challenged the constitutionality of the statute, arguing that PASPA impermissibly commandeers a state to implement a federal regulatory scheme because the state legislature has no choice but to keep sports betting illegal in the state.  The Third Circuit concluded that states had options, even considering that a state may repeal its prohibitions in whole or in part.

New Jersey then repealed its criminal prohibitions on sports betting to the extent those apply to casinos and racetracks.  New Jersey took the position that this partial repeal did not amount to a prohibited “authorization” because there is a distinction between authorizing and repealing.  The Third Circuit disagreed, but later agreed to review the case en banc.

Today, the en banc court, in a 10-2 vote, reaffirmed its prior position that New Jersey’s partial repeal amounts to an authorization prohibited by PASPA.  The court backpedaled from its earlier opinion:  “To the extent that in Christie I we took the position that a repeal cannot constitute an authorization, we now reject that reasoning.”  The court also continued to hold that states have more options under PASPA other than a total repeal of prohibitions on sports betting and maintaining those prohibitions as they currently exist.  “To be clear, a state’s decision to selectively remove a prohibition on sports wagering in a manner that permissively channels wagering activity to particular locations or operators is, in essence, “authorization” under PASPA. However, our determination that such a selective repeal of certain prohibitions amounts to authorization under PASPA does not mean that states are not afforded sufficient room under PASPA to craft their own policies.”

But the Court did not illustrate any meaningful options that a state has, other than to repeal its prohibitions on sports betting to the extent that they prohibit small bets between family and friends.  This is not an economically meaningful option, nor is stopping small bets among friends and family members a law enforcement priority.  “We need not, however, articulate a line whereby a partial repeal of a sports wagering ban amounts to an authorization under PASPA, if indeed such a line could be drawn. It is sufficient to conclude that the 2014 Law overstepped it.”

In dissent, Judge Julio Fuentes, the author of Christie I, concludes that the state’s repeal comports with the Court’s direction in Christie I and is therefore not a violation of PASPA.  He opined that there is a meaningful legal difference between authorizing and repealing and that New Jersey’s law does not grant any permission to anyone to do anything; instead it is a “self-executing deregulatory measure.”

Judge Thomas Vanaskie authored a separate dissent, arguing that PASPA is unconstitutional.  In probably the most powerful language anywhere in the majority or dissent, Judge Vanaskie states:

This shifting line approach to a State’s exercise of its sovereign authority is untenable. The bedrock principle of federalism that Congress may not compel the States to require or prohibit certain activities cannot be evaded by the false assertion that PASPA affords the States some undefined options when it comes to sports wagering.

Judge Vanaskie concludes that PASPA was intended to have the states implement a federal legislative program, and is, therefore, unconstitutional.

It remains to be seen whether New Jersey will seek certiorari from the US Supreme Court or try another means of repealing, or whether these decisions lead to a federal dialogue on a solution to sports betting.  With a multi-billion dollar unregulated and untaxed sports betting market in the United States, and a federal statute that dates back to before the prevalence of internet wagering, it is probably time to consider whether the status quo remains the best option.