Pennsylvania Court Tosses Ban on Casino Political Donations

A federal judge has overturned the state’s ban on political contributions from donors involved in the casino industry in a lawsuit brought by a Sands Bethlehem shareholder. Pasquale (Pat) Deon (l.), the chairman of the board of Philadelphia’s transit authority, SEPTA, initiated the lawsuit.

Pennsylvania Court Tosses Ban on Casino Political Donations

A federal judge in Pennsylvania has overturned the state law banning political contributions from donors with connections to the gaming industry.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Sylvia H. Rambo came in a lawsuit filed by two stakeholders in the state’s casino industry—Pasquale (Pat) Deon, chairman of the board for Philadelphia transit authority SEPTA, who also is a major shareholder in Sands Casino Resort Bethlehem. He was joined in the suit by Maggie Hardy Magerko, an owner of 84 Lumber and a beneficiary of the trust that owns Lady Luck Casino Nemacolin.

Rambo issued a summary judgment ruling that the state ban was too broad in scope, in that it was a sweeping ban preventing any key employee or supplier to a casino industry interest from donating to a political candidate or campaign.

“The stated purpose of the law is legitimate and commendable to the extent it seeks to prohibit corruption or the appearance of corruption, yet a laudable purpose is not dispositive as to the law’s constitutionality,” Rambo wrote in the ruling. “The court holds only that the ban in its current form goes much further than necessary to achieve its stated purpose of eliminating corruption and the appearance of corruption.”

Rambo further wrote that the law makes no distinction between someone like Deon, who is involved in the management of the Sands property, and Magerko, who has no direct role in the industry, other than being the daughter of Joseph A. Hardy III, the 84 Lumber founder who is the owner of the Nemacolin Woodlands Resort that is the site of the casino, owned by Eldorado Resorts, and was an original partner and licensee of the casino.

“Yet, the law makes no distinction between the two when it comes to banning political contributions,” wrote Rambo.