Quick Ruling Expected in Kentucky Internet Gaming Case, by Dan Cypra - Poker News Daily - 12th December 2008
Friday marked the resumption of the case involving the seizure and possible forfeiture of 141 internet gambling domain names by the Commonwealth of Kentucky. It pits the Justice and Public Safety Cabinet in the state against some of the most popular online poker, online casino, and online Bingo websites.
This time around, the proceedings took place in Kentucky’s largest city, Louisville, which plays host to the Kentucky Derby. The “Run for the Roses,” as it’s commonly referred to, plays out every May at the Churchill Downs racetrack. The Kentucky Court of Appeals held center court on Friday after Judges Michael Caperton, Michelle Keller, and Jeff Taylor approved petitions by the Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association (iMEGA) and Interactive Gaming Council (IGC). The two groups sought intervention by the Court of Appeals to act, arguing that the Commonwealth lacked jurisdiction to seize domain names and that allowing the case to play out would result in irreparable harm to the domain names involved.
Jennifer Brislin, Communications Director for the Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, told Poker News Daily that she was pleased with Friday’s hearing: “There is illegal activity occurring and that came across crystal clear. It’s now up to the Court of Appeals to determine whether these illegal sites will continue to thumb their noses at the Commonwealth.” In the case, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet Secretary J. Michael Brown has been the front man for the State, not its Attorney General. Brislin stated that she expected the higher court to rule as soon as possible in the high-profile rift.
Four attorneys took to the floor during the 50 minute appeals hearing. Online poker was brought up specifically, according to Associated Press writer Brett Barrouquere, who was present at the hearing. Barrouquere stated that the defendants argued that not every domain name in jeopardy belonged to an internet gambling site. That included mentions of online poker rooms involved. In the case, the domain names of Full Tilt Poker, Bodog, PokerStars, Cake Poker, Ultimate Bet, and Absolute Poker (among others) are at risk. The latter three sites have stopped taking Kentucky customers in order to adhere to a ruling by Judge Thomas Wingate at the Circuit Court level. However, if online poker is not “gambling,” then the sites may be exempt from the case.
Barrouquere told Poker News Daily that each party was grilled during the Court of Appeals hearing: “The three judge panel was well-prepared. There were a lot of interesting questions from the judges. Judge Keller focused on why the State didn’t treat illegal gambling the same way as it treated illegal drugs. Why not just go after the gambler as opposed to the website?” The State’s response: “The legislature specifically exempted the player from the legislation,” according to the Associated Press article.
Barrouquere revealed that tough, pointed questions were the theme of the day, with the judges involved having thoroughly reviewed the briefs and the lower court decision prior to taking the floor on Friday. Like iMEGA’s Chairman Joe Brennan and Brislin, Barrouquere expects an expedient resolution to the case. He explains, “They will rule fairly quickly. I don’t expect it to drag out. A lower judge has already agreed to let the suit go forward. If the State is correct and this is illegal gambling, then it’s still going on right now. If the State is incorrect, then it’s in everyone’s best interest for these sites to be able to operate without this cloud hanging over their heads.”
Judge Wingate upheld the Commonwealth’s seizure of the domain names on October 16th. Central to the case’s future are the answers to the several questions. First, does the State have jurisdiction to seize domain names, which are located in cyberspace, by using the “gambling devices” statute? iMEGA attorney Jon Fleischaker told Poker News Daily, “What you have in Kentucky law is that the forfeiture of gambling devices is in the criminal code. Forfeiture comes after a finding of violation of the penal code. You can’t have a violation of the penal code without a criminal statute. What the Commonwealth is trying to do is treat this as a civil proceeding.” The Commonwealth asserted that the URLs were “gambling devices,” similar to any of the objects such as slot machines and roulette wheels that would be found in an underground casino.
In addition, do the actions by Governor Steve Beshear and Brown violate the U.S. Constitution? The Commerce Clause (which states that the Federal Government is charged with regulating commerce with foreign nations) may have been trampled on. In addition, due process and free speech rights may have been overlooked.
We’ll keep you posted on further developments right here on Poker News Daily. (Credit: Poker News Daily)
Media Man Australia Profiles
Poker News
Casino News
