On Monday, May 14, 2018, the Supreme Court decision came down in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, No. 16-476, and New Jersey Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association, Inc. v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, No. 16-477, its first anti-commandeering cases in years. As explained and affirmed by the Court in New York v. United States and Printz v. United States, under the anti-commandeering principle, Congress lacks the power to regulate state governments’ regulation. At issue is whether a federal law—the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 (PASPA)—may constitutionally bar the State of New Jersey from repealing existing state law that prohibits sports wagering to the extent the law applies at casinos and racetracks. Petitioners contended that PASPA is an unconstitutional attempt by Congress to dictate state law. Respondents argued that PASPA does not bar New Jersey from repealing existing law but merely preempts the State from affirmatively authorizing sports wagering. They contended that the alleged “repeal” is in reality an attempt by New Jersey to selectively authorize sports wagering, which is lawfully preempted by PASPA.
The 6-3 decision, with Justice Alito writing for the majority, and its implications are discussed by our expert, Mr. Elbert Lin.
Featuring:
Mr. Elbert Lin, Partner, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.