Public Health Advocacy Institute files data lawsuit against Massachusetts regulator
Research center seeks to obtain court order against the Massachusetts Gaming Commission in order to force it to collect players’ behavioral data from casino operators
The Public Health Advocacy Institute (PHAI) has filed a lawsuit against the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) regarding a lack of data collection on behalf of the regulator.
The body is aiming for the Massachusetts Superior Court to issue a Mandamus Order against the regulator, citing its failure to adhere to Section 97 of the 2011 Expanded Gaming Act.
Said legislation requires the MGC to collect behavioral data from casino operators and share anonymized customer data with researchers.
That data can then be used to analyze which casino practices are causing harm to players, which specific players are being harmed, and what the casinos and the MGC can do to reduce gambling-related harm.
PHAI alleges that the regulator has “yet to collect a single piece of data from any licensee or make any data available to researchers,” despite it being a legal requirement for them to do so since 2011.
The lawsuit, filed by PHAI attorneys Andrew Rainer and Jacob Wolk highlights that Massachusetts’ data-collection requirement “represents a first-in-the-nation commitment to compile critical data about how gambling customers are put at-risk for harm.”
The suit also claims that the MGC “has failed to comply with its unambiguous statutory obligation to collect this data from the casinos and provide it qualified researchers.”
The court order, should it be granted, would require the Commission to start collecting the data it is alleged to have not done since its establishment.
PHAI executive director Mark Gottlieb said: “The requirement for the Gaming Commission to make this important research data available has been in place since the day the Commission was created more than a decade ago.
“All of our casinos have been operating for half a decade and only now, after two years of nudging from PHAI, the Commission finally claims to be getting closer to meeting its obligations.”
The MGC now has 20 days to respond to the lawsuit and argue why a Mandamus Order isn’t required.
Harry Levant, PHAI Director of gambling policy, added: “As a researcher exploring the public health impact of gambling, I know that anonymous player data has the potential to give us ways of reducing the harm that casino products can cause.
“The lessons that this data might teach us would be important to better regulate gambling in Massachusetts and wherever these casino games are available.”
EGR North America has contacted the Massachusetts Gaming Commission for comment.