Trump willing to talk to leagues about sports betting

“You know quite a bit, as a former casino owner, and you have a particular insight — today an estimated $5 billion will be wagered, $4.8 billion, unregulated and untaxed illegally,” Gray said. “What is your position and thoughts on making sports gambling legal nationwide?”

“Well, what I’d do is I’d sit down with the commissioners,” Trump replied. “I would be talking to them, and we’ll see how they feel about it. Some would not want it, and probably others — and I’ve read where others maybe do. But I would certainly want to get their input and get the input from the various leagues, and we’ll see how they feel about it.

“I’d also get the input from lots of law enforcement officials, because, obviously, that’s a big step. So we wouldn’t do it lightly, I can tell you. It will be studied very carefully. But I would want to have a lot of input from a lot of different people.”

“

“

As Trump suggested, NBA Commissioner Adam Silver is in favor of federal oversight of sports betting, and in recent days MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred has seemed to be heading in the same direction

”

The NFL and NCAA still seem adamantly opposed, while who would bet on the NHL – the other plaintiff in the New Jersey sports betting case.

Let’s look at how things might play out in 2017:

The U.S. Supreme Court recently asked the office of the U.S. Solicitor General for guidance on the merits of the Garden State’s sports betting appeal. Recent history suggests that his or her word will go – and that Chuck Cooper is the likely choice. There is some sentiment in legal circles that Cooper could see the case as a state’s rights issue, and recommend that the Supreme Court take the case.

If he does and they do, then the Court would hear the case by the end of the year.

“

“

None of the sports organizations favors New Jersey’s version – privately-run betting at state racetracks and Atlantic City casinos without government oversight

”

So would the leagues be wise to split the difference and get Congress – and Trump – to go for a federal legalization that would, well, trump New Jersey’s argument?

Another item of interest is that Cooper is very close with Jeff Sessions, the new Attorney General – who was approved following a Senate hearing in which Sessions was prepped by Cooper. Many U.S. gaming industry officials are nervous about Sessions on their issues, only in part because Sessions has suggested he will “revisit” the 2011 federal ruling that paved the way for New Jersey and Delaware to offer online casino gaming two years later.

Who else is Cooper close with? How about Ted Olson, who has been the lead attorney for New Jersey in the sports betting case for years. Their relationship goes back to the early 1980s as up-and-comer attorneys in the President Reagan administration. As the story goes, one day Cooper showed up for work to find a woman sleeping on his office case. It was the future Barbara Olson, who pulled an all-nighter prepping for the ill-fated Robert Bork confirmation hearing for the Supreme Court. Cooper attended their eventual wedding.

If the leagues believe Cooper – or some other pick – would recommend the case to the court, and if they believe the court would side with the state, then presumably they’d already be starting work behind the scenes. Or they could roll the dice and see what Cooper recommends, and what the court does, before acting.

The court could do a couple of things. If The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 is unconstitutional, then any state could offer Las Vegas-style betting. But if the federal law holds but the Court finds that New Jersey’s second try at a sports betting law is legit, then New Jersey gets an East Coast monopoly.

Congress could decide this themselves – also either voiding PASPA, or just adding New Jersey to Nevada in permitting the betting. But the latter is no longer likely, given that New York, Michigan, Mississippi, and other states are making noises about wanting sports betting as well.

One more curveball: A favorable Supreme Court ruling that knocks New Jersey out again could raise the stakes higher than the leagues can bear. That’s because there is no dispute among the parties that New Jersey could go back to the Legislative drawing board and use a “nuclear option” and eliminate its gambling laws entirely. Are the leagues willing to call that bluff? Is it a bluff?

We may never know.