Use of Wire Act Against Online Casinos Draws PPA Response

Many legal experts think the Justice Department's case would be thrown out in court, as the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled the Wire Act only applies to sports betting.

The plea by Partygaming shareholder Anurag Dikshit, acknowledging that he broke US laws by operating an online gambling site, has drawn a public statement from the Poker Players Alliance. The response, given by PPA Chairman and former US Senator Alphonse D'Amato, points out that Dikshit's settlement with the US Department of Justice does not apply as a precedent in any legally binding manner.

The US had used the Wire Act of 1961 as its basis for considering prosecution of Dikshit and his Partygaming partners. Many legal experts think the Justice Department's case would be thrown out in court, as the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled the Wire Act only applies to sports betting.

The PPA statement makes clear that, despite Dikshit's personal decision not to fight, the online gambling community still rejects the idea that the Wire Act, passed to prevent bookies from taking telephone bets, can be used to prove Internet casinos illegal. The release also notes the conflicts between the UIGEA and the Department of Justice reading of the Wire Act, and asks Congress to address the situation.

Momentum had built before the adjournment of the last Congress for the regulation of Internet gambling, and political observers say the only obstacle to new, looser national laws regarding online gambling is the nation's economic crisis, which will fully occupy lawmakers. Of course, legalizing online casinos also means creating a giant new source of taxable revenue...