Gambling News - July 24th, 2009 - Written by Glen
For weeks now, Delaware's sports betting, under the umbrella of the state lottery, has received major criticism. The NFL has been at the reigns of the opposition, and now the verbal hostilities have come to the culmination of a law suit.
The class action suit lists the NFL, the NHL, the NBA, the NCAA, and the Office of the Commissioner of Baseball as the plaintiffs. They seek to challenge the constitutionality of Delaware's "Sports betting scheme" as it pertains to not only the federal scale, but also Delaware's own constitution.
The plaintiffs claim that the sports betting "scheme" is an affront to professional sports. They claim that sports betting undermines the morality of professional sports, leading to the risk of corruption. They continue with the fact that, while Delaware was/is allowed to have sports betting in its previous form (parlay type bets) before Congress enacted a law barring sports betting within the states, Delaware is violating that same law by now introducing single game betting. The plaintiffs argue that this is against the law and the whole affair should be stopped before it is to start.
Delaware once had sports betting, but only on parlay type bets. The law that congress signed into effect in 1992 stated that they would only be able to resume that form of betting, and this is the main grounds on which the plaintiffs have built their case.
Sports betting was to be enacted before the opening of the NFL regular season in early September, and the NFL wants this to not happen. The defendants listed are Governor Markell and Wayne Lemons, the Director of the Lottery Office.
The burden of proof lies on the plaintiff, so their lawyers will have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the gambling that will take place is, in fact, against the law. Ultimately, the judge or judges within the District of Delaware will have to make a decision.
The matter was already brought to court and parley type bets have been deemed constitutional, but the judges would not, at that time, give an opinion on whether or not single game bets were to stand as legal.