A lawsuit that has been making its way through the federal court system in the U.S. has been stopped at the highest level. The New Jersey Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association (NJTHA) had sued sports organizations, including the NFL, MLB, NBA and the NCAA, for their role in stopping sports gambling in the U.S., and for backing out on a $3.4-million bond that had been issued to New Jersey’s Monmouth Park Racetrack. A federal appeals court had already decided that the NJTHA proved its arguments and was entitled to the repayment of the bond, but the organization wanted the leagues to cover losses incurred by the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 (PASPA), which was repealed by the Supreme Court two years ago. The leagues scoffed at the idea, asking the Supreme Court justices to weigh in on the matter. However, that’s not going to happen, and the leagues might now be sweating bullets.
The Supreme Court handed down its decision not to hear the case yesterday, saying that it doesn’t want to get involved. It issued a writ of certiorari, commonly known as “the rule of four,” without offering an explanation for its decision. As a result, a federal court judge in New Jersey, where the case started, will become the final authority to determine if the NJTHA has a rightful claim to the $150 million it says it has lost as a result of PASPA.
A writ of certiorari only requires that four of the justices reach a common decision on a case, less than half of the nine justices that sit on the bench. As a result, it appears that the Supreme Court is essentially saying to the sports organizations that they did not sufficiently justify their case or that its request didn’t have merit. This, coupled with the lower appeals court’s previous decision in favor of the NJTHA, is not a strong sign of support for the leagues.
It didn’t take long for the NJTHA to react to the announcement. One of its attorneys, Ronald Riccio, has already filed a notice with the U.S. District Court of New Jersey in which the NJHTA exercises its “right to renew its motion for immediate judgment” of the full amount of the injunction bond and interest, as well as a “partial summary judgment” for “liability for damages in excess of [the] bond amount.”
When the dust finally settles on the case, the NJTHA will most likely only walk away with the amount of the initial bond. However, if it is able to definitively prove that it incurred losses that were a result of any of the league’s actions, the damages could increase. Given that PASPA was a federal law, regardless of whether or not it was influenced by the leagues, proving the sports organizations are responsible for the losses is not going to be an easy task.
