Sports Betting Could Go Through Seminole Tribe, Avoiding Vote
Sen. Wilton Simpson, the Legislature's chief negotiator in gambling discussions with the Seminole Tribe, confirmed that the talks open the possibility of sports betting at dog tracks, horse tracks and jai alai frontons.
April 18, 2019 at 12:22 PM
5 minute read
Gambling talks underway between a key senator and the Seminole Tribe include a proposal that could bring sports betting to Florida by running it through the tribe, possibly avoiding the need for a statewide vote on the popular type of betting.
Sen. Wilton Simpson, a Trilby Republican who is the Legislature's chief negotiator in gambling discussions with the tribe, confirmed Wednesday that the talks open the possibility of sports betting at dog tracks, horse tracks and jai alai frontons. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed sports betting in Florida and other states with a ruling last year in a New Jersey case.
Simpson confirmed the Seminoles would serve as a “hub” for sports betting, meaning they would get a cut of the bets being made outside of their facilities, while being allowed to run sports books at their own casinos, a concept first reported Monday by The News Service of Florida.
The introduction of sports betting at the state's pari-mutuels could be problematic, however, due to a constitutional amendment that passed in November requiring statewide votes on citizens' initiatives that would expand casino-type gambling. That ballot measure was known as Amendment 3.
“There are many opportunities on sports betting. There is Amendment 3, also, that we have to contend with as part of that. So hopefully, if we get an agreement together, it will respect both of those things,” Simpson told reporters Wednesday evening. “We do want to make sure our pari-mutuel friends have the opportunity to do sports book, and we want to make sure that it's done in a way that is compliant with Amendment 3.”
When asked if having the tribe serve as a hub could avoid the need for a statewide vote on sports betting, Simpson said, “Perhaps. Yes. That's probably right. Yes.”
The constitutional amendment requires voter approval of “any type of games typically found in casinos.”
Backers of the constitutional amendment maintain the language covers sports betting outside of tribal casinos. Paul Hawkes, a lawyer hired by a political committee that spearheaded the amendment, wrote in a legal analysis provided Tuesday to House Speaker José Oliva and Senate President Bill Galvano that, at the time the amendment passed, sports betting was prohibited in most states.
“The proper inquiry is, where would a Florida voter expect to find lawful sports betting in November of 2018? Consequently, it is not a test of counting how many casinos offered sports betting, but it is really a test of venue,” he wrote. “It may not have been found often, but when legal sports betting was found, it was 'typically' found at casinos at the time Florida voters adopted Amendment 3.”
But not everyone agrees. Only a handful of casinos offered sports betting when 71 percent of voters approved the constitutional amendment in November, gambling lawyer Daniel Wallach, who is a national expert on sports betting, told the News Service in an interview this week.
Wallach said Hawkes is trying to “rewrite Amendment 3 to include new words that he wished were included in the amendment but were not.”
“The actual definition of 'casino gambling' asks point-blank whether sports betting is the type of game 'typically found in casinos,' and does not place the focus, as Hawkes urges, on where Florida voters 'would expect to find lawful sports betting in 2018,' ” Wallach said. “The test suggested by Hawkes is not supported by any of the actual words used in Amendment 3 and is a flagrant attempt to 'change the definition after the fact,' a maneuver that flouts basic rules of statutory interpretation in a manner that Florida courts would never countenance.”
Because tribal gaming is regulated by federal law, the constitutional amendment excludes gambling expansions by tribes. But it includes a provision saying the amendment does nothing to “limit the ability” of the state or tribes to negotiate compacts pursuant to federal law “for the conduct of casino gambling on tribal lands.”
With time running out on the legislative session slated to end May 3, Simpson had hoped to have a gambling bill for consideration by the end of the week.
But that now seems unlikely. The Republican leader, who is slated to take over as Senate president following the 2020 elections, said he has not briefed Oliva or Gov. Ron DeSantis on the details of a proposal.
“We're still making very good progress, and I hope that we'll have something shortly to talk about,” he said. “The reality is that we are getting closer and closer on some very big issues, and we are making very good progress.”
Simpson said he is nearing the point where he's ready to bring a final deal to DeSantis and Oliva, who'd have to give their blessing before legislation is introduced.
“Hopefully, we'll be able to get it across the line,” he said.
Dara Kam reports for the News Service of Florida.
|This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCOVID-19 Death Suit Against Nursing Home Sent to State Court, 11th Circuit Affirms
Year-End Tax Planning: How Real Estate Investors Can Leverage Qualified Opportunity Funds
5 minute read'Horror of Horrors': Florida Judges Spar Over En Banc Review in Binance Ruling
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1What Are Forbidden Sexual Relations With Clients?
- 2AEDI Takeaways: Demystifying Hype, Changing Caselaw & Harvey’s CEO Talks State of Industry
- 3New England Law | Boston Announces New Dean
- 4Nordic Capital Plans to Acquire IP Management Solutions Provider Anaqua
- 5Criminalization of Homelessness Is Not the Solution
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250