Supreme Court Conservative Justices Unite to Allow Sports Gambling

[FollowTheWay]

In the case of
MURPHY, GOVERNOR OF NEW JERSEY, ET AL.v. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSN. ET AL
all the conservative justices supported the decision in favor of allowing sports gambling.

ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, KAGAN, and
GORSUCH, JJ., joined, and in which BREYER, J., joined as to all but Part VI–B. THOMAS, J., filed a concurring opinion.
BREYER, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.
GINSBURG, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined, and in which BREYER, J., joined in part.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-476_dbfi.pdf
It is popularly accepted that Chief Justice Roberts and associate justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch, appointed by Republican presidents, comprise the Court's conservative wing. Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan, appointed by Democratic presidents, comprise the Court's liberal wing. Justice Kennedy is the swing vote.

The four conservative Justices plus Kagan and Kennedy voted for sports gambling. Three of the "liberal" Justices voted against gambling.

So what does the term "conservative Justice" mean?

 

[InTheLight]

The four conservative Justices plus Kagan and Kennedy voted for sports gambling. Three of the "liberal" Justices voted against gambling.

So what does the term "conservative Justice" mean?

It means they favor State's rights.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

[777]

No big surprise, it was expected to go down this way:

6-3 for finding the unconstitutional part of the federal law was not severable from the rest of that law and so that federal law had to be totally scrapped - Breyer, Sotomayor, Ginsberg in dissent.

7-2 that the federal law was a 10A violation, Breyer with the majority this time. Voided some old 1990s law that barred state-sponsored gambling except for Nevada, so expect some states to set up sports books now. More of a libertarian victory than a conservative one IMO..

 

[Rob_BW]

So a law saying Nevada can do it, and Oregon, Delaware, and Montana can kinda do it, but no other state can, is supposed to be constitutional? Lol...

 

[Revmitchell]

In the case of
MURPHY, GOVERNOR OF NEW JERSEY, ET AL.v. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSN. ET AL
all the conservative justices supported the decision in favor of allowing sports gambling.

ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, KAGAN, and
GORSUCH, JJ., joined, and in which BREYER, J., joined as to all but Part VI–B. THOMAS, J., filed a concurring opinion.
BREYER, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.
GINSBURG, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined, and in which BREYER, J., joined in part.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-476_dbfi.pdf
It is popularly accepted that Chief Justice Roberts and associate justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch, appointed by Republican presidents, comprise the Court's conservative wing. Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan, appointed by Democratic presidents, comprise the Court's liberal wing. Justice Kennedy is the swing vote.

The four conservative Justices plus Kagan and Kennedy voted for sports gambling. Three of the "liberal" Justices voted against gambling.

So what does the term "conservative Justice" mean?

Nope they voted for states rights. IN other words they said the fed has no business dictating to the states on this issue. I know you just want to bash conservatives but at least understand the issue before you comment else you make mistakes like this.

 

[FollowTheWay]

It means they favor State's rights.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

Legal nationally with states applying restrictions. Sounds like Roe vs. Wade to me.

 

[FollowTheWay]

Nope they voted for states rights. IN other words they said the fed has no business dictating to the states on this issue. I know you just want to bash conservatives but at least understand the issue before you comment else you make mistakes like this.

Legal nationally with states applying restrictions. Sounds like Roe vs. Wade to me.

 

[Revmitchell]

Legal nationally with states applying restrictions. Sounds like Roe vs. Wade to me.

then you don't understand Roe v. Wade

 

[FollowTheWay]

then you don't understand Roe v. Wade

In what way? Aren't individual states passing laws to restrict abortion in their state? I heard about one that makes it illegal to about after 6 weeks. Roe vs. Wade makes abortion legal nationally just as this law makes sports gambling legal nationally. States can then not allow it or restrict it locally.

 

[Rob_BW]

In what way? Aren't individual states passing laws to restrict abortion in their state? I heard about one that makes it illegal to about after 6 weeks. Roe vs. Wade makes abortion legal nationally just as this law makes sports gambling legal nationally. States can then not allow it or restrict it locally.

I'd say you can compare this ruling to Roe v Wade once there is a federal law proclaiming abortion legal in 4 states but illegal in the rest.

 

[InTheLight]

In what way? Aren't individual states passing laws to restrict abortion in their state? I heard about one that makes it illegal to about after 6 weeks. Roe vs. Wade makes abortion legal nationally just as this law makes sports gambling legal nationally. States can then not allow it or restrict it locally.

The Roe v Wade decision decided that abortion was a "right to privacy" under the 14th amendment. Thus it is applicable in all 50 states.

Gambling cannot be construed to be a constitutional right, therefore it falls under the purview of the 10th amendment, which says the powers not delegated or prohibited by the Constitution are reserved for the states.

This is 8th grade civics class stuff.

 

[Reynolds]

In the case of
MURPHY, GOVERNOR OF NEW JERSEY, ET AL.v. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSN. ET AL
all the conservative justices supported the decision in favor of allowing sports gambling.

ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, KAGAN, and
GORSUCH, JJ., joined, and in which BREYER, J., joined as to all but Part VI–B. THOMAS, J., filed a concurring opinion.
BREYER, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.
GINSBURG, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined, and in which BREYER, J., joined in part.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-476_dbfi.pdf
It is popularly accepted that Chief Justice Roberts and associate justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch, appointed by Republican presidents, comprise the Court's conservative wing. Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan, appointed by Democratic presidents, comprise the Court's liberal wing. Justice Kennedy is the swing vote.

The four conservative Justices plus Kagan and Kennedy voted for sports gambling. Three of the "liberal" Justices voted against gambling.

So what does the term "conservative Justice" mean?

It was a no brainer. The SCOTUS had already given Nevada sports betting. No way a good jurist could deny the other 49.

 

[FollowTheWay]

I'd say you can compare this ruling to Roe v Wade once there is a federal law proclaiming abortion legal in 4 states but illegal in the rest.

This bill makes sports gambling legal in all the states. Individual states can reject that. I don't understand your point.

 

[FollowTheWay]

It was a no brainer. The SCOTUS had already given Nevada sports betting. No way a good jurist could deny the other 49.

Sports gambling was made legal in Las Vegas in 1931. Now, 85 years later you think it was the right thing to do for all other states. I realize there's a lot of illegal sports gambling going on but making it legal means more people will do it. So you think that's good?

 

[FollowTheWay]

The Roe v Wade decision decided that abortion was a "right to privacy" under the 14th amendment. Thus it is applicable in all 50 states.

Gambling cannot be construed to be a constitutional right, therefore it falls under the purview of the 10th amendment, which says the powers not delegated or prohibited by the Constitution are reserved for the states.

This is 8th grade civics class stuff.

The Roe v Wade decision decided that abortion was a "right to privacy" under the 14th amendment. Thus it is applicable in all 50 states.

Gambling cannot be construed to be a constitutional right, therefore it falls under the purview of the 10th amendment, which says the powers not delegated or prohibited by the Constitution are reserved for the states.

This is 8th grade civics class stuff.

Wrong. Try reading the 14th amendment:

14th Amendment
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Roe v Wade used the stated right of LIBERTY to rule on abortion. I suppose you failed the 8th grade.

 

[FollowTheWay]

No big surprise, it was expected to go down this way:

6-3 for finding the unconstitutional part of the federal law was not severable from the rest of that law and so that federal law had to be totally scrapped - Breyer, Sotomayor, Ginsberg in dissent.

7-2 that the federal law was a 10A violation, Breyer with the majority this time. Voided some old 1990s law that barred state-sponsored gambling except for Nevada, so expect some states to set up sports books now. More of a libertarian victory than a conservative one IMO..

So so-called conservative judges are expected to greatly expand legal gambling in America?

 

[Rob_BW]

This bill makes sports gambling legal in all the states. Individual states can reject that. I don't understand your point.

This case (not sure why you are calling it a bill?) struck down a federal law from 1992. An obviously ill written and unconstitutional law.

Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 - Wikipedia

 

[Reynolds]

Sports gambling was made legal in Las Vegas in 1931. Now, 85 years later you think it was the right thing to do for all other states. I realize there's a lot of illegal sports gambling going on but making it legal means more people will do it. So you think that's good?

I think any time the Federal govt. gives power back to the states, its a good thing.

 

[FollowTheWay]

This case (not sure why you are calling it a bill?) struck down a federal law from 1992. An obviously ill written and unconstitutional law.

Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 - Wikipedia

Senior moment. Yes it's a case. Actually, I don't have a problem with legalizing gambling as long as it's properly regulated. (Everybody knows the mafia runs Vegas, right?) There has been a lot of illegal gambling going on and if legalized it can be controlled. This will probably put a lot of illegal bookies out of business and that's good.

I used the example of abortion and that's probably not the best thing to compare this to. I think the best comparison is with legalizing marijuana. I just found it odd that conservative members of the court are lauded for supporting what most evangelical Christians used to consider a vice.

 

[FollowTheWay]

I think any time the Federal govt. gives power back to the states, its a good thing.

As I said in my other reply another very similar thing is legalizing marijuana nationwide.