§ 1953, which criminalizes the interstate transmission of wagering paraphernalia, and 18 U.S.C. § 1955, operating a gambling business violates state law only if that conduct is illegal under state or local law. That strange rule exactly the opposite of the general federal approach to gambling, Under 18 U.S.C. Under § 3702(2), private conduct violates federal law only if it is permitted by state law. At page 28 of the Murphy opinion, the Supreme Court compared PASPA to several other federal anti-gambling laws (including the Wire Act and the Travel Act), and observed that such federal laws “ respect the policy choices of the people of each State on the controversial issue of gambling. The Supreme Court’s brief discussion of the Wire Act may have turned that thinking on its head.

The Disputed Paragraph of the Murphy Opinion Stated another way, the legality of sports betting in a particular state would not provide any defense to a Wire Act prosecution where the charged offense is based upon the interstate transmission of a “bet” or “wager.” Unlike several other federal anti-gambling laws (such as the Travel Act), the Wire Act does not require a predicate violation of state law to support a criminal conviction. This is because the Wire Act criminalizes the interstate transmission of all bets and wagers on sporting events, regardless of whether such betting is legal in a particular state. In short, the Wire Act prohibits any person or entity engaged in the business of sports betting from using “wire communication facilities” (such as the telephone or the Internet) to “transmit” bets or wagers on sporting events - or even “information” relating to bets or wagers - through “interstate commerce,” which generally (but not always) means across state lines.Įven with the Supreme Court’s invalidation of PASPA, the Wire Act would still stand as a formidable legal obstacle for the transmission of sports wagers across state lines, even in those situations where both of the States at issue (i.e., the state where the wager was initially placed, and the state where the wager is ultimately received) had legalized sports betting.

With the demise of PASPA, the Wire Act looms as the most important federal law affecting the future of sports betting. At issue is the Court’s brief discussion of the federal Wire Act at page 28 of the Murphy opinion.

Online sports betting controversy usa