A less optimistic article

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
It's part of the law, but I do not think that blocking Internet access to a site that offers free poker, regardless of whether it offers real money poker is valid under the fifth amendment.
What about the due process rights of those who wish to access the site to play free poker which is legal under this law?

[/ QUOTE ]

An Internet site that offers free poker AND gambling, definitely blocked IMHO. Blocking US access to a Internet site that offers only free poker won't happen per this pending law. You may not like it but laws restrict a lot of "rights".

[JPFisher55]

Remember the bill of rights is superior to any law. Laws that abridge the requirement of due process are subject to being declared as null and void because they do not conform to the constitution. The problem is that the Supreme Court has allowed too many abridgements of the bill of rights. But this is a legal argument against blocking Internet poker sites or Neteller.

[crzylgs]

LOL @ anyone who thinks the Bill of Rights will save us.

Which amendment, exactly?

[JPFisher55]

Most likely is 5th amendment due process.

[AlexM]

Is what it says in there about Indian Reservations being exempt true? If so, that's a loophole large enough to steer a battleship through.

[TheCaptain]

Remember, in practice, the Bill of Rights is more like guidelines than actual rules.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
LOL @ anyone who thinks the Bill of Rights will save us.

Which amendment, exactly?

[/ QUOTE ]

The Tenth, but the Feds don't give a damn about the Constitution.

[JPFisher55]

The Supreme Court sure has treated them that way; even the freedom of speech in FEC v. McConnell in which the Campaign Finance Reform passed muster even though it restriced political speech; arguably the most protected right in the Bill of Rights.

[eigenvalue]

A very optimistic article:

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_law/article/1446

Best regards

eigenvalue