In a landmark ruling, the DC Court of Appeals for the Circuit overturned a lower court ruling and paved the way for Seminoles to offer sports betting throughout Florida.
Today, the DC Circuit Court announced the verdict In a Florida sports betting case, Seminoles should be allowed to operate mobile sports betting in the state.
this is reversed Federal District Court Decision Entering into an agreement with the tribe in 2021, effectively granting the tribe a monopoly on sports betting in Frodia, violated the Indian Gambling Regulation Act (IGRA).
A lawsuit filed by casino operators West Flagler Associates and Bonita Fort Myers Corporation has forced Hard Rock Digital’s sportsbook offline in just over a month in December 2021.
“The Seminoles of Florida are pleased with today’s unanimous decision,” Seminole spokesman Gary Bitner told iGB.
“This is a positive outcome for the Seminoles, the people of Florida, and Indian Country at large.
Background: Promoting Florida Sports Betting in 2021
The case dates back to early 2021. That same year, an agreement was signed allowing the Tribe to offer mobile and face-to-face sports betting within the state. Approval of Governor Ron DeSantis. The compact will also include roulette and craps games at tribal casinos across the state, with bets being made from servers on tribal lands.
The deal allowed Seminoles to partner with a parimutuel gaming operator in return for a 13.75% equity stake and a 10% contribution from the casino’s sportsbook to a Florida treasury.
After it was ratified by Congress and signed into law by DeSantis, The U.S. Department of the Interior “Approved” the Compact. The DOI did not expressly approve or reject the agreement, but took no action within the 45-day period. In other words, the agreement automatically entered into force.
case against compact
Pari-Mutuel Gaming Operator West Flagler Associates West Flagler Associates and Bonita-Fort Myers Corporation filed a lawsuit In September 2021, it argued that the mobile element amounted to expansion beyond the tribe’s land. Plaintiffs argued that this could only be approved by a statewide referendum.
It further argued that this violated both the Illegal Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) and the Telecommunications Act, as the bets were theoretically made from US jurisdictions where online gambling is prohibited.
The lawsuit argued that India’s gambling laws make it clear that tribal bets must be made on tribal lands. The State of Florida and the Seminoles argued that they could not change the boundaries of the tribal lands or “convert gambling that took place outside the tribal lands into gambling that took place on the tribal lands.”
This was upheld by Justice Dabney Friedrich, who ruled that the agreement was an attempt to “license sports betting in India and abroad.”
“In the words of the statute itself, the agreement permits such gambling by ‘regular patrons physically located in the state.'” [of Florida] but not on [the Tribe’s] Indian Lands,” said Friedrich, reviving the Seminole’s 2010 pact.
The judgment explained
A circuit court judge ultimately dismissed the allegation that Interior Secretary Deb Haaland’s failure to act on the agreement violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Instead, she allowed the bill to pass after the 45-day action deadline had passed.
It also denied that this “approval by omission” violated the APA for four reasons:
- The licensing of gambling on Indian soil was illegal under IGRA.
- I was violating the telegraph law.
- You have violated the Illegal Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA).
- It violated the Fifth Amendment guarantee of equal protection.
Are mobile bets made inside or outside the land of India?
The first claim was dismissed by the court because the terms of the compact allowed the Seminoles to offer sports betting on their land. Mobile gambling is “deemed” to be made on Indian soil and does not allow online gambling.
“The legality of Indian off-land gambling and other related activities under state or tribal law is not affected by their inclusion as the subject of the agreement,” the ruling explained.
However, the presiding judge acknowledged that the ruling was particularly narrow and ruled only that Harland did not violate the APA.
“We express no opinion as to whether the Florida law ratifying the agreement is constitutional.” […].
“That matter and other related matters of state law are outside the scope of the Secretary’s review of the agreement, are outside the scope of our judicial review, and are best left to the discretion of the Florida courts as a matter of discretion. ”
This effectively means that the Seminole mobile sportsbook could eventually be brought back offline if the challenge is successful.
What about other claims?
The lawsuit argued that the agreement would permit transactions in violation of the Telegraph Act of 1961. West Flagler argued that online communications “almost always” are routed between servers in and out of state.
But the judges dismissed this reasoning, citing, among other things, the fact that the agreement did not authorize trading, “which itself precludes any challenge to the Communications Act.”
In any event, the treaty stipulates that the Seminoles must act in “strict compliance” with the Telegraph Act, the judge noted. Moreover, this argument does not hold even if wagered on Indian land using West Flagler’s reasoning.
Claims of violations of the UIGEA were similarly downplayed. The ruling explained that the agreement itself did not encourage violations, so the charges were purely hypothetical.
Finally, the Fifth Amendment violation was dismissed on the grounds that “promoting the economic development of federally recognized tribes” was fully constitutional.
