READ THE BRIEF HERE

West Flagler and Associates (WFA) Tuesday (21 May) discounted a recent argument by the the US Department of Justice (DoJ) in the Florida sports betting case. The reply from the parimutuels suing the federal government is the final piece needed before the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) considers whether or not it will take the case.

WFA argues that the 2021 Florida-Seminole Tribe compact explicitly allows for wagering outside of Indian Country. That allowance, it says, violates the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). Last Week, the DoJ wrote that the validity of the compact isn’t a federal issue and it doesn’t violate IGRA. Further, the DoJ argued that the US Department of the Interior’s (DoI) decision to allow the compact to become "deemed approved” does not violate any laws, state or federal.

WFA Filed A Writ Of Certiorari with the Supreme Court in April. At issue in the Florida wagering case is whether the DoI should have approved a compact that gives the Seminoles exclusivity to online wagering. It also allows the Seminoles to accept a digital bet placed anywhere in the state of Florida. Those bets, according to the compact, are considered placed in Indian Country if they flow through a tribal server.

WFA’s ultimate goal would be either to open the Florida market or shutter the Seminole’s Hard Rock Bet platform. The tribe Launched The Platform in November 2023.

WFA: Appellate court decision in conflict with SCOTUS

Previously, a US District Court judge ruled in favor of WFA, but that decision was overturned by a three-judge panel at the appellate level. WFA appealed for an en banc appellate hearing, but the full court declined to hear the case. Now, the question is whether or not SCOTUS will. That decision is expected as early as next month.

In Tuesday’s filing, WFA lawyer Hamish Hume argues that even though the DoJ believes that the compact doesn’t violate IGRA, its argument for why means SCOTUS should hear the case.

West Flagler’s argument

The DOI argued that the agreement doesn’t violate the IGRA, while West Flagler believes the government agency’s argument actually gives the U.S. Supreme Court reason to look at the case.

“The centerpiece of the Government’s IGRA argument is that the Court of Appeals correctly interpreted the Compact as not authorizing any sports gaming off Indian lands and therefore the approval of the Compact did not violate IGRA,” the reply brief reads. “By contrast, the Government effectively concedes that if the Compact authorized gaming off Indian lands, then its approval would have violated IGRA and the Court of Appeals’ decision would have conflicted with decisions of this Court and other circuits, necessitating review and reversal by this Court.

“Thus, the central IGRA question boils down to whether the Court of Appeals properly held that it could ‘interpret’ the Compact as not authorizing sports gaming off Indian lands. If it did, then no review is warranted. If it did not, then even the Government implicitly concedes that review and reversal are needed.”

With West Flagler’s response filed, it’s up to the Supreme Court to determine if it wants to hear the case.

https://sportshandle.com/west-flagler-replies-florida-sports-betting-case/