On Sept. 17, the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a decision of the federal district court in New Jersey enjoining the state’s sports-wagering law, which would have allowed betting on sports events at the state’s existing racetracks and in Atlantic City. On Nov. 15, that same appellate court denied the state’s request to rehear the case. Gov. Christie has publicly vowed to take this “fight” all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if not successful in the lower courts. Based on the 100-page opinion of a two-judge majority of the Third Circuit, coupled with a solid dissent by Judge Vanaskie, some argue he has a shot. With the denial to rehear en banc in mid-November, the ball’s in Christie’s court to take his shot at the court.
I wrote in an op-ed, in a shore area publication, back in March that Christie’s fight would likely not survive constitutional muster on appeal. This proved to be true when two of the three judges on the appellate panel focused on the same arguments by the sports associations (and the federal government) that persuaded the district court judge.
