Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Poker Discussion > Poker Legislation

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-13-2007, 02:56 PM
JPFisher55 JPFisher55 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 963
Default Re: To answer your hypothetical question, try ACLU v Gonzales.

Unfortunately, AG's like a lot of prosecutors, think Nifong and DOJ, make lots of statements of law that they can't and won't back up.
Don't believe Jay Nixon; believe the case law that I and Skallagrim have cited.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-13-2007, 03:00 PM
TheEngineer TheEngineer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,730
Default Re: To answer your hypothetical question, try ACLU v Gonzales.

[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, AG's like a lot of prosecutors, think Nifong and DOJ, make lots of statements of law that they can't and won't back up.
Don't believe Jay Nixon; believe the case law that I and Skallagrim have cited.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why I was curious to see the statement.

It's fine for the AG to have an opinion, but AGs don't make laws (legislative branch), nor do they interpret them (judicial branch). Seems odd for Bachus and the other prohibitionists to cite executive branch opinions, as their only function is to enforce the laws others pass and interpret. As such, it would be interesting to see what laws the AG cites in his opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-13-2007, 03:49 PM
Skallagrim Skallagrim is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: The Live Free or Die State
Posts: 1,071
Default Re: To answer your hypothetical question, try ACLU v Gonzales.

I'd like to see the actual statement of that Missouri AG too, are you certain he was specifically referring to PLAYING poker on the internet? I doubt it, he was probably referring to laws that forbid runnning an unlicensed casino in Missouri. And even if he believes that law applies to the internet (Missouri gambling laws do not mention the internet at all) this is a highly dubious opinion for legal reasons we have discussed too many times before for me to repeat them now and would not apply to players anyway.

Whose opinion is correct? No one will know for certain until there is an opinion from the highest court with jurisdiction.

And one final point on AG opinions, it was not that long ago that many US Attorneys were running around saying that poker was "unquestionably" covered by the Wire Act (a few of the political appointees STILL do); this did not in any way stop 2 US Circuit Courts of Appeal from ruling that the Wire Act only applies to sports betting, rulings pretty much accepted as final now in the legal community given the same US Attorney Office's decision to not appeal these cases to the US Supreme Court.

Skallagrim
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.