A Peculiar Piece Of Legislation
Published: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 Online-Casinos.com
A PECULIAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION
Another legal view on US anti-online gambling measure
"When read outside its complex factual context, the [UIGEA] act is a peculiar piece of legislation," opines the legal publication TheLawyer.com this week. "On its face it does very little, primarily because it does not define what 'unlawful internet gambling' is."
Analysing the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 the publication says that the Act makes it a crime for any gambling business to accept a transfer of funds in connection with unlawful internet gambling. It further provides that regulation must be put in place requiring financial service providers to "identify and block" any payments relating to unlawful internet gambling.
But, "the law does not make it illegal to actually gamble on the internet, therefore gamblers themselves are not breaking any laws," the article points out, remarking that in essence, the 2006 act only covers internet gambling that was already illegal under either state or federal law.
"The act is nevertheless important because it removes some of the ambiguity that existed within the arsenal of US gambling prohibition laws," TheLawyer.com comments.
"First, it makes it clear that any internet gambling that violates a state law is automatically a breach of federal US law, irrespective of the type of gambling and the supply method.
"Second, the act makes it clear that internet gambling that takes place legally within the territory of one state does not violate US federal law."
TheLawyer says that one thing the UIGEA clearly doesn't do is to bring the US into compliance with its World Trade Organisation (WTO) obligations, following the loss of the dispute settlement case brought by Antigua.
"A WTO panel is investigating whether the US has in the meantime complied with its WTO obligations. The UIGEA, however, has made US non-compliance considerably worse.
"First, by making it crystal clear that the US does not oppose internet gambling per se, but only internet gambling that crosses the border of a state.
"Second, by the act recognising that public interest concerns can be addressed by regulation and technology.
"Third, the act explicitly preserves the de facto exemption for internet betting on horse races."
