Washington Rejects Online Gaming Plea

0 Comments   Email   Print

Lee Rousso is a Seattle lawyer who for the last few years has been fighting through the courts to overturn the Washington State ban on Internet gambling. After losing out in the two lower courts he had pinned his hopes on a favorable decision by the Washington State Supreme Court. But his appeal was rejected here as well. On September 22 the nine member bench unanimously declared that the state law did not violate the federal commerce clause of the US Constitution and therefore was not invalid.

Justice Richard Sanders, who wrote the judgment, put things in perspective. He said that the question before the court was not whether Internet gambling should be illegal. Only the legislature can determine that and the legislature declared online gambling illegal by enacting and amending RCW 9.46.240. This act, which is referred to as draconian by the Internet gambling community, criminalizes the willful transmission and reception of gambling information over Internet. The Court also denied any responsibility in determining whether the said law was wise from the perspective of the associated social advantages and disadvantages.

One of Rousso's main arguments had been that the ban on Internet gambling by the Washington State was discriminatory. The Court found no evidence of this. The bench held that the law "equally prohibits Internet gambling regardless of whether the person or entity hosting the game is located in Washington, another state, or another country." Rousso had pointed out that the law permits intrastate land gambling and therefore the same rules have to apply. The Court did not agree with this. It in turn pointed out that the ban was on transmitting bets electronically. If land based casinos did this they too would be violating the law. Rousso had also claimed that by exempting horse racing from its purview the law had discriminated against online gambling. The Court pointed out that horse racing is not treated as gambling under the state statute.

The Poker Players Alliance (PPA) was backing Rousso, who is a member. The PPA respondent to the verdict by saying, "We are extremely disappointed in the State Supreme Court's ruling given the clear evidence that the state legislature never sought to regulate Internet poker as it does in-state bricks and mortar card rooms and Internet horse racing, but instead simply banned Internet poker and, even worse, criminalized the players. This law is still a mistake, and we will continue to fight to have it overturned." It is getting more and more evident that the battle will have to be waged in the legislature and not in the courts.

News Item Tools

 Email     Print     Digg     Del.icio.us    StumbleUpon

Comments

 Add Comment

Add Comment

More News