Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Poker Discussion > Poker Legislation
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 09-17-2007, 08:06 PM
JPFisher55 JPFisher55 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 963
Default Re: murskansky or however u spell it--the new atty general

[ QUOTE ]
"It's a side point anyway. I really don't see this guy, a well-respected retired judge with a generous pension, accepting the position of Attorney General with a year left in Bush's term just so he can shut down some porn shops. I can't see online gambling being high on his list of priorities."

I pretty much agree with this. There is just so much to do to turn the DO"Just Us" back into a DOJustice, that online gambling will not be a priority.

But thats not to say it wont get some attention; certainly the regs will finally get written. Though with some luck an old time conservative like this one may be inclined to order simple regs that look good but in reality accomplish little and keep the banks happy. We can hope anyway.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

But Skall, if the regs are meaningless then how does an online poker player obtain standing to litigate against the UIGEA and the regs? I just am not satisfied with the iMEGA brief and I worry that they will lose due to lack of standing. I read their recent brief and am still dubious about standing. Perhaps if they had named one member like Party Poker, then I would feel better.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 06:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.