[cero_z]

[ QUOTE ]
It sounds as if the courts have already ruled:

"Judge Duvall ruled that the Wire Act only prohibited wagering on sports events and he dismissed all 33 cases, noting that “Comparing the face of the Wire Act and the history surrounding its enactment with the recently proposed legislation, it becomes more certain that the Wire Act's prohibition of gambling activities is restricted to the types of events enumerated in the statute, sporting events or contests.” In other words, online poker was not within the reach of the Wire Act’s prohibition. The District Court of Appeal agreed with Duvall’s ruling that the 1961 Wire Act does not apply to online poker."

[/ QUOTE ]

Right; this is according to Shulman, and was one of the most compelling parts of her piece, IMO. Can anyone corroborate or discredit this logic?

It seemed to me that many of the folks on here who were interpreting the new legislation last week, thought that it did make online poker newly illegal, via the clause about unlawful internet gambling. I, too, read that clause that way. She is saying (and appears to be correct) that it does nothing new in that area.