Tag Archives: U.S. Supreme Court

Florida Law Professor Requests Argument Before Court on Sports Betting

On October 17, 2017, Florida State University professor Ryan Rodenberg asked the U.S. Supreme Court in an amicus brief to consider all of its options before ruling on a challenge to a federal sports betting ban. Rodenberg, whose research is in sports law analytics, requested the court to grant him five minutes in oral arguments to argue that the court should rule based on the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) without ruling on the law’s constitutionality. Rodenberg’s amicus brief is his latest…

Continue Reading....

Will the U.S. Supreme Court “Take a Gamble” on New Jersey’s Stance to Legalize Sports Betting?

On Tuesday, September 5, 2017, the State of New Jersey, a state horsemen’s association, and a group of policy members urged the United States Supreme Court to deem a federal law prohibiting states from authorizing sports betting unconstitutional. The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) is a federal law that directs states to maintain in effect their state-law prohibition on sports betting. New Jersey is trying to overturn the Third Circuit’s August 2016 holding that New Jersey’s attempt to repeal its sports betting…

Continue Reading....

Indian Gaming Association Latest to Join Coalition to Legalize Sports Gambling

On June 26, 2017, the Supreme Court agreed to tackle the hotly debated question of whether the federal government should be able to prohibit states from legalizing sports gambling. The lawsuit commenced six years ago, when New Jersey Governor Chris Christie implemented a state law that would enable New Jersey casinos and racetracks to offer sports wagers. That New Jersey law was then challenged by the NCAA and “Big Four” of professional sports leagues, the NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL. The opposition argued that the…

Continue Reading....

New Jersey Fights Back for Supreme Court Sports Betting Review

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, New Jersey and the state’s Thoroughbred Horseman’s (NJHTA) association made a final push to convince the U.S. Supreme Court to review whether a federal law, PASPA, can prevent New Jersey from repealing its laws banning sports betting in its state. Also referred to as the Bradley Act (the name of the law’s main sponsor, Sen. Bill Bradley), PASPA was intended to stop the spread of sports betting in the United States. Passed in 1992, PASPA stopped new states from legalizing…

Continue Reading....

U.S. Solicitor General Won’t Support Sports Betting in New Jersey

It may soon be another sad day in New Jersey for fans that enjoy betting on their favorite sport. A bill led by New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone would have the Supreme Court overturn “the 25-year-old prohibition on state authorization of sports betting.” However, on Wednesday, May 24, 2017, United States Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall recommended that the Supreme Court deny New Jersey’s certiorari petition. There have been recent studies that the Supreme Court follows the recommendation of the Solicitor General 79.6 percent of…

Continue Reading....

Supreme Court Grants Cheerleading Apparel Manufacturer’s Request: Uniform’s Decorative Elements are Copyrightable

The U.S. Supreme Court held that a cheerleading uniform’s decorative elements may be protected under copyright law — a ruling aimed at providing some resolution regarding the disagreement over when these types of designs are eligible for protection under U.S. copyright law. As background, in 2010, Varsity Brands, Inc., the country’s largest cheerleading supplier, accused one of its rivals, Star Athletica, of copying the key elements of its uniform’s design, including stripes, chevrons, and other graphic elements that Varsity had registered with the Copyright…

Continue Reading....

Will President Trump Change the Course of Sports Betting in the United States?

Earlier this month, the United States Supreme Court chose not to strike down New Jersey’s challenge to the federal ban on sport betting, but rather called upon President Donald Trump and his administration to opine on the controversial issue. This decision comes after New Jersey’s multi-year long fight to convince the federal government to end its ban on sport betting, in order to benefit New Jersey’s struggling casinos and racetracks. As background, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) has prohibited most states…

Continue Reading....

Supreme Court Blocks Appeals Over NFL Concussion Settlement

On December 12, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it will not hear the appeals concerning the concussion-related settlement between the National Football League and more than 20,000 former players. This class-action originated when former NFL players accused the NFL of hiding its true knowledge of the link between football and the degenerative brain disease known as chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE. Upon reaching a settlement, however, a group of dissenting retirees argued that it “unfairly favored currently injured retirees and left thousands of…

Continue Reading....

NFL Takes its Turn, Asks High Court to Not Review Concussion Settlement

A few weeks ago, it was the players. Now, the National Football League is asking the Supreme Court to not reject a deal between the league and roughly 20,000 former players dealing with systemic injuries of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). The Third Circuit Court of Appeals expressly approved a settlement that was expected to provide the two certified classes with more than $900 million of relief. The approval of the settlement, authorized earlier this year, was met with resistance. A group of players petitioned the…

Continue Reading....

Concerns Over Efficacy of Historic CTE Settlement Reach the Supreme Court

Major fault-lines are coming to the fore in one of the most high-profile class action lawsuits dealing with the NFL and players affected by a condition known as chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). Earlier this month, a group of plaintiffs requested the Supreme Court of the United States refuse to review a pair of appeals, submitted by other plaintiffs, challenging the efficacy of an April 2015 settlement. Specifically, the appeals focus on the argument that the current settlement will not be “enough” for former players with…

Continue Reading....