US Supreme Court denies stay petition in Florida sports betting case
Prior temporary stay order vacated in landmark case as Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggests case raises “serious equal protection” issues
The US Supreme Court has denied a petition by West Flagler Associates to stay a mandate allowing the Seminole Tribe to operate online sports betting in Florida.
Late on Wednesday (25 October ), US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts denied West Flagler’s full petition to stay a prior ruling by the DC Court of Appeals, with Roberts having granted West Flagler a temporary stay on the ruling earlier this month.
“Application (23A315) for stay presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the Court is denied. The order heretofore entered by The Chief Justice is vacated. (Detached Opinion),” an update on the US Supreme Court website said.
In that detached opinion document, US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh outlined his support for Roberts’ decision to deny the stay petition, and for the prior June ruling by the DC Court of Appeals in the case.
The DC Court of Appeals ruled that the 30-year tribal gaming compact only applied to on-reservation gaming on Indian land and did not bar the Seminole Tribe from accepting bets remotely, a ruling which Justice Kavanaugh suggested in his remarks was correct.
“If the compact authorised the Tribe to conduct off-reservation gaming operations, either directly or by deeming off-reservation gaming operations to somehow be on-reservation, then the compact would likely violate the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, as the District Court explained,” Kavanaugh wrote.
He continued: “To the extent that a separate Florida statute (as distinct from the compact) authorises the Seminole Tribe – and only the Seminole Tribe – to conduct certain off-reservation gaming operations in Florida, the state law raises serious equal protection issues.
“But the state law’s constitutionality is not squarely presented in this application, and the Florida Supreme Court is in any event currently considering state-law issues related to the Tribe’s potential off-reservation gaming operations.”
Equal protection refers to the 14th amendment of the US Constitution, which states that no state should deny equal protection of its governing laws to any individual or group by acting discriminatorily.
Kavanaugh’s assertion that there are “serious” equal protection issues relating to the case would seem to suggest that the Supreme Court believes this is the crux of the case.
The Seminole Tribe, which signed the 30-year compact in May 2021 and later began operation of the Hard Rock Digital sportsbook in September, was later forced to shutter its sportsbook operation after Florida-based parimutuel operators West Flagler Associates and Bonita Fort Myers Corporation launched successful legal proceedings on grounds the compact was illegal.
A protracted legal battle ensued, with the Seminole Tribe launching an appeal and with that case being transferred to the DC Court of Appeals, where the tribe won its appeal. Since then however, West Flagler Associates and Bonita Fort Myers Corporation have challenged the ruling, leading to today’s news.
The denial of stay does not mean the end of the case, however, as West Flagler Associates has until 11 December to file a writ of certiorari petition for a review by the US Supreme Court.
In the interim, the Seminole Tribe is effectively free to restart online sportsbook operations in Florida via the Hard Rock Digital sportsbook, however it is understood there are no plans to do so.
In comments reported by Legal Sports Report, a spokesperson for the Seminole Tribe said: “The denial of the stay by the US Supreme Court is very good news. The Seminole Tribe of Florida is heartened by this decision.”
West Flagler Associates and the Bonita Fort Myers Corporation are additionally contesting the legality of the Florida tribal gaming compact in the Florida Supreme Court, with this case resting on arguments that the compact was unconstitutional.
Arguments in the case have been made by the US Department of the Interior, which has previously submitted briefs asserting the constitutionality of the compact, and Florida advocacy group No Casinos, which has stated the opposite.
A written response from the Florida Solicitor General’s Office, acting on behalf of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis as well as Senate president Kathleen Passidomo and House speaker Paul Renner, is currently outstanding, with the office recently winning an extension on submission to 1 December .