Why We Can Now Bet on Sports | Murphy v. NCAA
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ก.พ. 2025
- I wrote a new book all about the Supreme Court. Order your copy here: amzn.to/45Wzhur or visit www.iammrbeat.....
In episode 49 of Supreme Court Briefs, New Jersey tries to legalize sports betting, so NCAA and four professional sports leagues sue them. #supremecourtbriefs #10thamendment #apgov
Mr. Sinn's video about loot boxes: • Are Loot Boxes A Form ...
Subscribe to @MrSinn
Patreon: / iammrbeat
Donate on Paypal: www.paypal.me/...
Buy Mr. Beat T-shirts, coffee mugs, etc.: www.iammrbeat....
Reddit: / mrbeat
Mr. Beat's band: electricneedler...
Mr. Beat on Twitter: / beatmastermatt
Mr. Beat on Facebook: / iammrbeat
Mr. Beat on Instagram: / iammrbeat
Mr. Beat's Discord server: / discord
Produced by Matt Beat. All images by Matt Beat, found in the public domain, or used under fair use guidelines. Music: "In the Atmosphere" by Bad Snacks.
Special thanks to the AP Archive for footage for this video. It made a huge difference! AP Archive website: www.aparchive.com
Photo credits (Creative Commons):
Postdlf
Check out cool primary sources here:
www.oyez.org/c...
Other sources used:
blog.jipel.law...
www.natlawrevi...
www.sporttechi...
thehill.com/op...
observer.com/2...
www.nj.com/new...
www.njonlinega...
New Jersey
November 8, 2011
Citizens vote to make betting on sports legal. This was a big deal. At the time, 97% of all sports bets placed in the country were illegal.
The New Jersey state legislature then passed and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie signed into law the Sports Wagering Act of 2012, which let citizens place sports bets at casinos and racetracks. Well the NCAA, NBA, NFL, NHL, and MLB were like “nuh-uhh.” They sued Governor Christie, arguing that New Jersey legalizing sports betting went against the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, aka PAPSA, passed by Congress back in 1992. This law banned betting on sports except for a few special places that were exempt. Well apparently New Jersey was not special enough.
Governor Christie was like “Yeah, I KNOW New Jersey legalizing sports betting went against PAPSA, but the Tenth Amendment is on our side.” You see, the Supreme Court had previously established this thing called the Anti-Commandeering Doctrine in two cases, New York v. United States (1992) and Printz v. United States (1997). The doctrine basically said the federal government can’t force states or state officials to adopt or enforce federal laws.
Soon the U.S. Department of Justice joined forces with the sports leagues, and when they went to U.S. District Court in February 2013, their main argument was that sports gambling not only hurt their leagues, but hurt the integrity of the sports. The judge agreed and ruled with the sports leagues and Justice Department.
Governor Christie and New Jersey appealed to the Third Circuit Appeals Court, but they upheld the ruling. After the Supreme Court refused to hear another appeal in the spring of 2014, the New Jersey legislature went back to the drawing board. Since the Sports Wagering Act was unconstitutional, they just went back and repealed parts of existing New Jersey laws from 1977 that had banned sports gambling. Oh snap. What a sneaky way to legalize sports gambling. But Governor Christie was like “sorry, not sorry” and vetoed the repeals, saying “we can’t just bypass the Third Circuit’s ruling, guys. However, just a few months later, Christie changed his mind and signed it into law.
Welp, the five sports leagues sued New Jersey again in November 2014. Yet again, the District Court and Third Circuit ruled in favor of the sports leagues.
But Christie and New Jersey begged the Supreme Court to consider an appeal again, specifically bringing up the question “Does a federal statute that prohibits modification or repeal of state-law prohibitions on private conduct impermissibly commandeer the regulatory power of States?” and they cited good ol’ New York v. United States as precedent. Well that got the Court’s attention this time. They agreed to hear the case on June 27, 2017.
The Court heard oral arguments on December 7, 2017. By this time, New Jersey had elected a new governor, Phil Murphy.
My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available!
Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS
Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680
Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680
Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss
Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b
Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023
Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495
Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e
You missed a golden opportunity to use the infamous picture of Chris Christie in the beach chair!
lol that would have been a bit harsh
I prefer people avoiding cheap shots when possible.
@@Justagamerhere1 You must be fun at parties.
If it's legal, it can be taxed $$$$ 😀😀😀
That is why better legalize and legally control weed, so you can tax them
you can say so
Indeederoo
R E A and regulated. That’s why I think all drugs should be legal. Better heroine be sold in licensed and regulated drug stores than buy a shady drug dealer in a back alley who laces it with fentanyl.
@@elijahfordsidioticvarietys8770 not really. Making a drug as addictive as heroin that easily accessable is just asking for trouble.
I agree with Christie here (never thought I’d say that) and I like the states legalizing marijuana but the anti-commandeering doctrine sounds terrible in some cases. Imagine if Eisenhower got sued b/c of his enforcement of Brown v. Board of Education or states could just ignore the civil rights act. You could think of thousands of laws that could be a disaster if the states were allowed to ignore.
Yep, it can be a slippery slope.
Lol same, Christie was a horrible governor, but this, I actually agree with him
Well, if you have federal laws when possible like with the Civil Rights Act, they still trump state laws via the Supremacy Clause. However, federal law can't interfere with intrastate commerce like gambling, so the argument makes sense here.
Sometimes RBG confuses me. I’ve been wrong about where I’d expect her to vote pretty much every time save the obvious cases.
the more left leaning judges would tend to side for ncaa bc this gave states a lot of power (hence why breyer only partially sided with the majority)
I’m guessing some of the left leaning judges were against legalized sports betting because it would hurt poor and marginalized people the most. The casinos/sportsbooks make their money off of people with gambling addictions making poor choices. While I think it’s a gross and evil industry, I also think people should have the freedom to do what they want with their money even if it’s something that will most likely lose them money aka gambling
@@GeorgeavocadosI think it’s more being anti-states rights
@@Georgeavocados I agree about the evils of gambling, but I disagree with your freedom argument. Even if no else is harmed, sometimes you need to protect from their own stupidity. It's why we have seat belt laws among other things.
@@Compucles Seat belt laws are also ridiculous, functioning adults are self-reliant and don't need protection.
Awesome video Mr Beat. I live in Washington I believe state gambling is illegal here but there are still lots of casinos on the Native reservations here.
Yeah, that's how it is in Kansas. Imagine how much those casinos on reservations would suffer if gambling was legal everywhere? Thanks for the kind words.
its nice to see more states being able to do more things , my states has been doing pull tabs for decades and legalized cannabis a few years ago, now taco bell sales are up too .
as a Dolphins fan i am not betting on the dolphins to win the superbowl this year O_O
lol Taco Bell sales up
Finally, some New Jersey representation, I'm still waiting for that New York vs. New Jersey video
Peruvian Potato coming from Hunterdon county Jersey has better pizza
Don't worry. It's on my list!
@@ianmoore3470 Not lying, from Hudson County
I live in AC, so I'm glad you covered this case
Should gambling be completely legal?
Yeah but under supervision
Regulated but legal.
Regulated
Maybe not. But then the states need to create rules and laws for it. Just creating one single rule for all states may not be the best idea to solve a problem that varies a lot. For example, Las Vegas may use one sort of rules while California may use anything set of rules. The same is the case with gun laws. Some states where people hunt may need another set of rules than the ones in New York.
Yes it’s what I live off as i work at a casino
best teacher in America
Aww thanks :D
I like these videos because I do not know anyone else that does this specific thing.
I'm one of the only dorks who would even consider it. :)
4:14 Stu Feiner making the first legal bet in Atlantic City
Good catch, but I think you meant Stu.
Finally Mr. Beat talks something about New Jersey !! Great Video sir!!
I think sports gambling will be a big history lesson. Mr.Beat is awesome.
How has no one pointed out what a great SB pick that was? Mr. Beat could be rich by now!
lmaoo frrrrr
Great video Mr Beat. However I want to see the Curt Flood Case which opened the door for MLB free agency back in the 1960s & 70s. Would love to see more sports related cases. Have a nice weekend.
Right on. Thank you and thanks for the suggestion!
Hi Mr Beat. Thankyou for putting out good concise summaries of important SCOTUS decisions. Although I am not an American, I follow US politics and dabble in a bit of reading about US Constitutional law. My current favourite justice on the Supreme Court bench is Neil Gorsuch. I was wondering who is your favourite judge currently sitting on the Supreme Court bench and why ?
I like Gorsuch. And Kagan, too.
@@iammrbeat Thankyou for responding. Interesting choices. Gorsuch is a bit of a maverick. Very principled to his judicial philosophy and approach and will follow that to its end including in cases traditionally not seen as Conservative stances like in criminal justice or Indian Tribal rights (the latter I think comes from his 10th Circuit experience). Kagan is an interesting foil for him in many respects. More orthodox, more concerned with stare decisis than method itself. A more leftwing version of Roberts. She's focused on the practicalities of the decisions, maybe moreso than Gorsuch. Her dissent in the Gerrymandering cases is a prime example.
Unlike Ginsburg and Sotomayor, she's also proven herself more willing to side with Conservatives on certain issues like the Maryland cross case.
It’s wild how much things have changed regarding public opinion and the opinion of the sports leagues themselves around betting since this decision.
Does this mean that if Ohio changes/repeals its laws on sports gambling, Pete Rose can get in the Hall of Fame?
Neil Bhatia if a state raises its speed limit from 55 to 70 can I get a refund on my old speeding tickets?
No. Even if Rose were innocent of breaking state laws, it wouldn't change the fact that he violated baseball rules by betting on games he was involved in.
That's up to the Hall of Fame committee really.
@@iammrbeat Actually, it's up to the Commissioner's Office. Rose automatically became ineligible for the Hall of Fame due to being banned for life from Major League Baseball.
Supposedly Congress is going to revisit this and regulate it in a slightly less illegal way, but it’s Congress so I wouldn’t hold my breath
Yeah I heard that, too. Thanks for bringing it up!
Mr. Beat luv you Beatie
That's the most photogenic I've ever seen Chris Christie.
lol and here I thought the picture was unflattering.
5:40 oh shit this aged pretty WELL...
As an Englishman I'm amazed the US (or the individual States) don't legalise it and tax it. The British Govt. makes a fortune from its gambling taxes. You can bet on anything within reason in the UK (the bookies' odds on general elections are usually more reliable than the polls) either on the course or in a bookies shop.
We do tax it. It's just that many of us don't think the extra tax revenue is worth legalizing it, especially in the case of sports betting with the "integrity of the games" argument.
I get the 10th Amendment argument, as you can't have a federal law interfering with intrastate commerce like gambling, thus leaving the power to the States, but gambling itself is a drain on society. It ruins lives, the few people who do win big get rich out of luck with no real effort, and the only other winners are rich casino owners and other proprietors who get richer. There is extra tax revenue gained from it, but overall it's not worth it.
Thank you again Mr. Beat for collaborating with me. I am curious... When the Chiefs win the super bowl and you double your life earnings. What will you do with the money?
Actually, my life earnings is in the negative, so it'd be a double negative. Ha! :sigh: Anyway, thanks again for collaborating with me!
Buy a candy bar perhaps?!
This "anti-comandeering doctrine" would be the most laughable argument you'd probably be able to try to present to a court in Brazil. The Union can do absolutely anything without the states approval, even passing constitutional ammendments stripping states from their powers.
Yeah, I remember when I first learned of it, it did seem a bit ridiculous.
I do see a point to it, but it should go both ways. But, I can see that people will argue that's why we pay federal taxes and state taxes and not a single tax. But I would argue that Canada having a single criminal code nationwide and also a much more definite division of powers says otherwise.
The Supreme Court got the decision right.
Yeah, I think I agree with you.
Shoulda bet on that Cheifs prediction
noticed!
No, gambling on college sports has been proven time and again to hurt the inegrity of our institutions of higher learning. The NCAA and various other institutions have worked tirelessly for decades trying to prevent undue influence in the form for monetary and other monetizing (is that a word?) awards for exceptional, or deceptively poor performance on the field of play. While professional sports should not be immune from market pressures, making gambling legal on college sports is an entirely different thing from all other types of betting and should be illegal.
You make a good point about college sports. I hear the same thing about paying college athletes. The NCAA and collegiate programs already make so much money off the players, though. :/
The NCAA can always make its own rules, such as "no gambling in the stadium" or "athletes may not receive any awards or the like for winning."
@@moonman239 How does limiting the location of the actual gambling prevent gamblers from bribing college players into throwing a game?
And then the biggest irony was that now the sports leagues want their cut of the money bonanza...
Because of course they do
You should definitely do a Supreme Court Briefs episode on the Janus v. AFSCME case from 2018. It really changed a whole lot about what unions could do regarding membership fees.
Yes it made it so state unions CAN NOT force people to pay fees into a Union they don't think represents them.
@@AdamSmith-gs2dv ok boomer
Thank you Christie very cool.
And his name didn't even get on the case.
4:25 see, personally I support federal rights over states rights. This time I have to support states rights only because it would be unmarkably stupid to make this a federal issue.
Texas vs California compared?
Betting your life savings on the chiefs is a good idea. But if you are actually serious about it, you’d sell the house and make it a real bet.
Don't tempt me.
So ... let me get this right ... for many years, there was a federal law on the books that prohibited states from repealing their own laws (on this specific topic)? So, they can enact a law, but once enacted, can't change their mind??? That's crazy.
Thank you for this video
Thanks for watching!
As a resident of New Jersey, I am very pleased with the work of both Gov. Christie, and Gov. Murphy regarding this subject in fighting the lawsuit, as well as the courts final ruling. Atlantic City needs a rebound, and this can certainly help it get back to where it once was.
Hey Mr. Beat! you were my 7th grade history teacher at ABMS! my names JJ Cooper so i’m not sure if you will remember me because it’s been forever! i’m a senior this year 😟
Hey JJ! Yeah I remember you and holy crap you're a senior now?! I actually teach some seniors now. What are you doing after you graduate?
Mr. Beat i’m probably going to juco and than onto ku! still don’t know exactly what i’m gonna be doing yet but time will tell😀
I have a perception of loot boxes, that creates a non gambling benefit as to why a loot box could be earned, or be traded into.
Interesting topic.
I think I agree on the court with this one. I think the sports leagues don't have the authority to sue a state over gambling. They're two separate business.
Yeah, I tend to agree with them on this one as well.
I wish this didn't happen because the ads for the websites are annoying
Will you do the case on partiasian gerrymanding.
Yeah, but I'm kind of first hoping for another case to go through to end it!
Loot boxes is a worse form of gambling imo as the target market sometimes isn't just adults. But adults should be allowed to democratically choose if they want certain types of gambling in their state. In my state in Australia you can gamble longer hours (4am cut off) than drink (3am cut off).
bruh the chiefs actually did win 😳
I know!!!! I wish I really did bet my life savings.
Becamea addicted by the briefs 🤦🏻♂️🤣🤣🤣
States don’t have to follow federal law? What good is federal law then?!
Exactly. It can be a slippery slope.
President During this time: Donald Trump
Chief Justice: John Roberts
Argued December 4, 2017
Decided May 14, 2018
Case Duration: 161 Days
Decision: 7-2 in favor of Murphy
I disagree completely with the court on this decision, article 6 section 2 of the constitution says that federal law has supremacy over state law but also, what is the point of having federal law if the states can just ignore it?
Love your videos but I wouldn't bet my life savings on the Chiefs haha, listen to Mrs. Beat 😝
Good thing I don't have much life savings to begin with. :D
Did you see how he hesitated at the end of the video? He knows...
@@shannonbeat wise man 😂
Mr Beat, are you excited about the St. Louis Battlehawks?
I haven't got excited about the XFL yet, but when I do that'd likely be my team.
This is crazy
Which part of it? Or all of it?
Wasn't the NFL already endorsing Fan Duel and Draft Kings by this point? Trying to prevent this law while supporting a private business in the same industry seems SUS.
Who do you think will win the super bowl
Could you do New York Times v. Sullivan next?
You should do Young v. United Parcel Services
Wait why is this Murphy v NCAA and not New Jersey v NCAA? Why sue the governor it and not the whole state?
is the Kentucky Derby one of those special betting exemptions
Hello Mr beat
What up
Do you have patreon
I do!
'What is gambling' I've figured it out lol
I support anything that destroys the atrocity that is Las Vegas.
Kind of like how Pennsylvania legalizing gambling has been killing Atlantic City.
@Dianne Higo More like spread it out throughout the country.
@@bonecanoe86 God bless that.
lol I like Vegas for some reason
I love gambling been betting on sports in DE legally for years now
Can you cover the case of US V. Lopez
You still write "Ginsberg"
I think I reused an old typo.
how do us laws when it comes to internet?
is it a question of where the server stands or where the customer lives?
so if a customer who lives in a state where it is not legal to gamble uses a server that is in a place where it is legal, would this be legal or illegal?
That would be Illegal but it might as well be legal since there is zero way for the Feds to enforce this law without a Chinese style of internet which is unconstitutional since that violates the first amendment.
If NJ wanted to get a bit more creative, they could've simply deprioritized enforcement of sports-gambling bans. For example, the Legislature could've reduced the funding to the agency in charge of enforcing the ban. Or perhaps Governor Christie could have issued an executive order to prohibit or inhibit state resources from being used in the arrest or prosecution of illegal gamblers. Basically, "sports gambling is still a crime but the State doesn't care, so..."
Then if the sports leagues tried to sue again, the State could say: "Sports gambling is still illegal here in New Jersey, so we aren't in violation of the PAPSA. We've simply chosen not to enforce the ban that's on our books."
You could still successfully sue someone for not enforcing a ban.
Bro do comparison between Kansas and Arkansas (sounds like our Kansas 🤭)
You shoulda bet that money; they did win!
Hold on sports betting has been illegal in the US all this time??? damn
Just most of it, but yeah. And sure, people did it anyway.
Wait why didn’t the leagues want sports betting I’m confused
banning gambling just empowers criminals just like prohibition did
True that
nj made an offer judges could not refuse...
I hate that this happened, gambling is a plague that keeps poor people poor
Interesting, I don't gamble because I don't think it is the right thing to do. If you as an adult want to spend your money gambling, it is your property, and you shouldn't be hounded by the government.
Mr. Sinn, really? This guy needed to invent a name for this gambling video on the spot or what?
Maybe he's irish. Like Sinn Fein.
He was cursed with a weird name...like me.
He’s my teacher here in MN and I do believe he’s Irish and German and he’s probably the best teacher I’ve ever had (right up there with Mr. Beat). Also I believe his name comes from the “occupation surname” era (Smith, Baker, etc.) and he may have had an ancestor who was a known sinner making it Sin (later changed to Sinn to help family image, which paid off as he teaches at a catholic high school😂😂)
Hustler Magazine v. Falwell! Important and interesting free speech case.
That one is definitely planned, but not sure when yet.
Excellent! I look forward to its eventual arrival in my feed, though I watch all these videos lol
Banning gambling is like banning alcohol (and prostitution and abortion frankly). A waste of time and effort. It will happen no matter what the law is.
AC IS ON THE REBOUND 😂👌
The Chiefs did indeed win the Super Bowl this year!
And this year as well
I am not sure whether this was a good decision
Can people vote on thee leaders of their State? No, right?
And they can vote for the fedral leader
Everything’s legal in New Jersey (hey, someone had to make the reference!)
Loot Boxes are a piss poor game design and a predatory mechanic.
Legal but not promoted, have laws in place that restricts advertising to minors.
This is easily a top 3 worst decision of the decade
Why?
Poor New Jersey (((
Always
that's a gooooooooooooooood bet.
Cheifs vs Saints SB54
I would love that. It'd be fun to watch.
How about The Supremacy Clause of The Constitution ?
Nothing in the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution requires the commandeering of state resources in the enforcement of Federal law.
@@alexanderwinn2896 Thank you for helping me to understand it
Alexander for the Winn :)
And next episode. Episode 50: ENDGAME. No no no, not that one. Or that one.
Or that one.
@@elijahfordsidioticvarietys8770 That was a Supreme Court case? :)
Mr. Beat oh yeah. Archie Comics sued Marvel studios for copyright infringment.
They concluded that it was ok, because it wasn’t technically the same title, and they never trademarked the word “endgame”.
Hm. Maybe that’s not the best 50th episode special:
Spread the gospel
Betting will hurt the integrity of the sports? lmao do those leagues know that people bet on all of those things in the UK? Especially NFL
Yea it's a very poor arguement. The only way it would hurt the integrity of sports is if it's DIRECTLY tied to the leagues.
Lol the chiefs actually did win the superbowl that year
Based!
how is that based lol are you an elon musk drider
Sports betting is definitely a guy thing, the two women supreme court justices were against it.
Something something about the psychology of men.
You should of made that bet. Lol
. 🌚
👍👙👌
👟👟