The Justice Department got an assist last week when Sheldon Adelson’s Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling (CSIG) filed an amicus brief in the appeal of the victory by the New Hampshire Lottery against the DOJ. The CSIG was joined by the National Association of Convenience Stores (NACS) in the brief, and argued semantics when it comes to the lower court’s decision to ignore a DOJ memo that overturned a previous memo that said the Wire Act only applies to sports betting, not online lottery sales or online gaming.
The brief argues that New Hampshire’s contention that the Wire Act does not apply to the state is specious, and says the word “whoever” can be widely applied to many entities, including the state.
Secondly, the brief says the use of the word “person” in the Wire Act applies again to many entities, even though in the past, person was meant to exclude states and jurisdictions.
With New Hampshire making this assertion, the state could conceivably sell lottery tickets to people in Georgia or allow someone from Kansas to access online slot games, according to the brief.
The brief points out that the Wire Act couldn’t have predicted that states might operate gambling entities since when the act was written in 1961, only Nevada had a legal gaming business and no states were involved in lottery sales.
New Hampshire has yet to respond to the DOJ’s appeal of the decision in District Court, and it’s unlikely that it would address any of the issues in this brief because these were not arguments made by the DOJ in its appeal.
The Lottery must file its response to the DOJ’s appeal by February 26.
