International edition
April 18, 2021

The Department of Justice is due to oversee its revised stance on all forms of gambling

US Representatives could block funds for Wire Act reinterpretation enforcement

US Representatives could block funds for Wire Act reinterpretation enforcement
Set to be debated by the US House Committee on Rules, the new amendment could act as a further obstacle towards the enforcement of the revised ruling by the DoJ.
United States | 06/21/2019

An amendment filed by and New Hampshire, Georgia and Kentucky's Representatives would prevent the DoJ from using funds to carry out the enforcement of the Office of Legal Counsel’s opinion that the Wire Act applies to all forms of gambling, and not just sports betting. This reinterpretation is due to take effect by December.

U

S Representatives have reportedly submitted a new amendment to the Supreme Court which would block funds directed towards the Department of Justice (DoJ), which is due to oversee the enforcement of the revised stance on the 1961 Wire Act.

The HR3055 outlines federal funding for a number of the country’s government departments and initiatives, including that of the DoJ.

The amendment, filed by Georgia Representatives Hank Johnson and Sanford Bishop, Kentucky’s Andy Barr and New Hampshire’s Chris Pappas, will prevent the DoJ from using funds to carry out the enforcement of the Office of Legal Counsel’s stance that the Wire Act applies to all forms of gambling, and not just sports betting.

It follows on from the news that the DoJ had previously informed all staff that the new opinion of the Wire Act would not be put in place until December 31, 2019 —before this it was due to take effect as from June. Set to be debated by the House Committee on Rules, the new amendment could act as a further obstacle towards the enforcement of the revised ruling by the DoJ.

Earlier this month, New Hampshire District Court set the DoJ’s opinion aside, opting for the 2011 interpretation that the Wire Act legislation was only applicable to sports betting, which followed on from a challenge on behalf of the state lottery. It is yet to be confirmed whether or not the ruling will be appealed.

Leave your comment
Newsletter Subscription
Subscribe to receive the latest news and updates
Enter a valid email
Complete the captcha
Thank you for registering to our newsletter.