SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
U.S. states will be able to legalize sports gambling following a Supreme Court ruling. New Jersey will be among the first to do so:
The U.S. Supreme Court freed states to legalize gambling on individual sporting events, unleashing what will be a race to attract billions of dollars in wagers and heralding a new era for the nation's sports leagues.
The justices on Monday struck down [PDF] the federal law that had barred single-game gambling in most of the country, saying it unconstitutionally forced states to maintain their prohibitions. Nevada has been the only state with legal single-game wagering.
Sports gambling could begin in a matter of weeks in casinos and racetracks in New Jersey, which instigated the legal fight by repealing its gambling ban. Mississippi, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware and West Virginia could follow soon, and the number of states might reach double digits by the end of the year.
Also at SCOTUSblog, Reuters, and USA Today.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Tuesday May 15 2018, @01:39PM (1 child)
Its interesting, but its in the genre of "here's how Sanders still could win" or "Hillary has a 99% chance to win today" big lie propaganda via simplification.
The specific problem with Murphy and PASPA and all that, is that in every state except Nevada, the federal law permits, at the federal level, lawsuits by professional sports organizations against any state other than NV for any generalized complaint about sports gambling, except NV where they're immune from lawsuit. Specifically in the situation with NJ, the feds wouldn't allow NJ to either outright permit or decriminalize sports gambling (two separate lawsuits and injunctions happened). In no case was it ever justified why the citizens of NV have more privilege and freedom enforced at the federal level than citizens of NJ beyond a certain obvious "we paid the legislators to provide favoritism toward the citizens of NV so F the citizens of NJ". In a glossy propaganda sense of smearing "who" is "who" you could kinda describe that as the feds telling the locals what to do, but the real problem with PASPA and why it got overturned is "Uh, its OK if NV does it but not any other state" is a ridiculous violation of equal protection clause, its like something right out of the pre-civil war slavery law based on state, or pre-civil rights era legality of Jim Crow laws. Also its not like the feds are telling NV what to do, that lack of equal protection is kinda the whole point of the problem.
The other carefully not discussed propaganda issue is its LONG established case law that sports betting and gambling and lottos in general are a states right issue, and PASPA was merely a legalized federal extortion racket against states that didn't implement a state's right the way the feds law said they feel that states should implement their internal state rights. Kinda like excessive federal intrusion into K-12 local education via extortion is often an issue. However its comical to claim there is long established case law that national borders and citizenship are enforced or regulated at the state or muni government level, so the states and muni's saying "F you we're not going to follow federal law with respect to federal matters" is essentially a declaration of civil war, 1860s style. This supreme court case is something entirely different like "Every state in the USA can freely regulate state level matters without unequal-at-the-state-level harassment from the fed level"
Its actually kinda difficult to pull an analogy with immigration out of PASPA that isn't pure propaganda. I honestly don't think I can do it and I'm usually pretty good at this. Any analogy at all is tricky... something like if the feds tried to enforce state-level favoritism WRT concealed carry laws such that the NRA as a private organization with the explicit support of the feds was able to sue in federal court a list of oppressive states and not permitted to sue free states WRT concealed carry laws...
I haven't run into very much from thinkprogress that doesn't implement (poorly) multiple techniques of propaganda while not telling most of the (poorly researched) story; I'm just saying that its not historically a valid source of anything but fake news. It should be possible to express leftist viewpoints without outright lying to the reader ... shoudn't it? Or if it isn't, which seems to be the case, doesn't that imply some interesting larger scale things? Its possible that there are stories on thinkprogress that never get cited and discussed that are not outright propaganda fake news; I'm not aware of them but they may exist. Regardless, in this specific situation the thinkprogress story is outright disinformation of the very basest sort.
The future of PASPA is probably roughly 49 state lawmaker bribes in the usual sense, or at least attempts to buy them off, rather than one federal lawmaker bribe financed law. Or maybe someone will "discover" that gambling is a federal level issue not state level, who knows.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 15 2018, @06:32PM
You're pretty close.
I read the judgement, and the key point at issue is whether PASPA constitutes commandeering; i.e. the feds telling the states what and how to regulate, on a topic that properly resides with the states.
The basic defence from the federal side was: "We didn't tell them what laws to pass! We told them what laws NOT to pass! And how we'd punish their citizens if they followed state law!"
The response from SCOTUS on a 6/2 with one split decision was: "Fuck that noise. Telling the states what laws they can't pass, on a state jurisdictional issue, is just as bad as telling them what they must pass. This law is invalid, and we also don't think that Congress would have meant to pass it all piecemeal, so we're not doing the seperability thing to save chunks of this law."
To me the most interesting thing was that the judgements from the pro-federal-interference side came from left-wing justices. ... go liberty? I guess?