7/10/2007 iMEGA Suit Against UIGEA Strongest Fight Against the US Bill

[snappo]

http://www.gambling911.com/Online-Ga...EA-071207.html

Updated: UIGEA Hearing Set for September 4

"A Federal Judge in the state of New Jersey has assigned a hearing date for its lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales that seeks to have an new online gambling law, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) overturned. Gambling911.com has learned that the hearing date is set for September 4. Judge Mary L. Cooper of the US District Court in Trenton, NJ will hear the matter.

The group, the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association (iMEGA), has a good shot, according to Cassimir Medford who has been covering the online gambling legal climate for Red Herring

iMEGA's goal is to get the court to declare the UIGEA unconstitutional and unenforceable, according to Medford. That’s because the group says the act violates the First Amendment’s rights to freedom of speech and commercial association as well as the Tenth Amendment’s protections of states’ rights to regulate online gambling.

'The UIGEA can still be enforced prior to the September 4 date,' he said. 'But we feel confident that the judge will prevent that from happening.'"

[JimmytheHat19]

So, this is what I wanna know. I am no legal expert nor do I even understand half the terms I have just read in this thread. Here is what I DO know: I'm 25 yrs old and I derive most of my income from playing online poker. I live in Colorado. I have very serious concerns (maybe paranoia) about one day waking up and finding that I wont be able to withdraw money to pay my bills. I also have concerns that long-term losing players won't be able to deposit money onto the sites, which ultimately ends up in the hands of players like me. This obv creates a problem as to how much money I am able to make.

From everything I've read, it sounds to me like there is a good chance of things working out. But I want someone who knows what they are talking about to tell me the WORST CASE SCENARIO for a guy like me. What if Imega fails in court to prove their case and the judge grants the UIGEA constitutional and everything moves forward from there? What if the fed writes the rules into play and prohibits banks from transferring any money between players and the sites, and vice-versa? Again, I really dont understand all this stuff and I am just describing it as I understand it. Please correct me if I sound like an idiot. Will I be out a job? Even if it all goes to hell, will there ALWAYS be a way to get money out of the site and for losing players to deposit? One other fear I have is that the remeaining US-accepting sites might get scared and pull out of the US market for a few yrs until things cool down and online gaming is legalized and regulated, a la partypoker? If THAT happens, I am definately screwed. I make a good living for myself playing poker online, 12-tabling for 5 to 7 hrs a day. I make about 3 times as much as I would hanging sheetrock or swinging a hammer. I am an uneducated person but intelligent when it comes to poker and right now I am very happy with how things are going for me and I get really upset everytime I think about what the govt is trying to do to online poker which is so clearly a skill game. Is there anything I can do to help you guys with the fight? I sent letters to my state congressman several months back and I am a paid member of the PPA.

Well, I realize this was long and prbly boring to most of you but this is a super-important issue to me and I dont really understand all the legal mumbo-jumbo I read in these threads. Any feedback on my questions would be greatly appreciated, especially the worst-case scenario questions. Thanks.

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
So, this is what I wanna know. I am no legal expert nor do I even understand half the terms I have just read in this thread. Here is what I DO know: I'm 25 yrs old and I derive most of my income from playing online poker. I live in Colorado. I have very serious concerns (maybe paranoia) about one day waking up and finding that I wont be able to withdraw money to pay my bills. I also have concerns that long-term losing players won't be able to deposit money onto the sites, which ultimately ends up in the hands of players like me. This obv creates a problem as to how much money I am able to make.

From everything I've read, it sounds to me like there is a good chance of things working out. But I want someone who knows what they are talking about to tell me the WORST CASE SCENARIO for a guy like me. What if Imega fails in court to prove their case and the judge grants the UIGEA constitutional and everything moves forward from there? What if the fed writes the rules into play and prohibits banks from transferring any money between players and the sites, and vice-versa? Again, I really dont understand all this stuff and I am just describing it as I understand it. Please correct me if I sound like an idiot. Will I be out a job? Even if it all goes to hell, will there ALWAYS be a way to get money out of the site and for losing players to deposit? One other fear I have is that the remeaining US-accepting sites might get scared and pull out of the US market for a few yrs until things cool down and online gaming is legalized and regulated, a la partypoker? If THAT happens, I am definately screwed. I make a good living for myself playing poker online, 12-tabling for 5 to 7 hrs a day. I make about 3 times as much as I would hanging sheetrock or swinging a hammer. I am an uneducated person but intelligent when it comes to poker and right now I am very happy with how things are going for me and I get really upset everytime I think about what the govt is trying to do to online poker which is so clearly a skill game. Is there anything I can do to help you guys with the fight? I sent letters to my state congressman several months back and I am a paid member of the PPA.

Well, I realize this was long and prbly boring to most of you but this is a super-important issue to me and I dont really understand all the legal mumbo-jumbo I read in these threads. Any feedback on my questions would be greatly appreciated, especially the worst-case scenario questions. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you can go to a live card room. Its a boring bitch of a way to make a living but you can.

What you can do. Well, talk to people, make an effort to go out and make conversation about poker/gambling. If you can support him, sign up for a Ron Paul group. Do what the rest of us do, keep writing your legislators, regulators, and editors. Call into a radio talk show. Vote. Donate money. Im in the same boat you are, a nice living has come crashing down to where Im afraid to spend money outside of a stripped down monthly nut. Congrats on still multi tabling that many hours a day, I cant stomach how little I make doing it, so I barely play. This summer SHOULD be the worst of your life if you stay in poker. None of us KNOW if it will get better, but we think the worst has hit barring a massive IRS crackdown.

[MiltonFriedman]

All your concerns are justified. Do not count on even the current situation to remain. (I think it will to a large extent, but be prepared for change. Keep in mind that eight years ago your "job" did not exist afterall.)

Do not leave money you need to pay bills in your poker bankroll. Take it out and put it somewhere a bit more liquid and safe.

If you really make 3x as much playing online poker as hanging sheetrock, consider leaving the country to keep your "job". (People leave their home country to pursue a better economic situation every day. Why do you think online operators are offshore ?)

[JimmytheHat19]

[ QUOTE ]
All your concerns are justified. Do not count on even the current situation to remain. (I think it will to a large extent, but be prepared for change. Keep in mind that eight years ago your "job" did not exist afterall.)

Do not leave money you need to pay bills in your poker bankroll. Take it out and put it somewhere a bit more liquid and safe.

If you really make 3x as much playing online poker as hanging sheetrock, consider leaving the country to keep your "job". (People leave their home country to pursue a better economic situation every day. Why do you think online operators are offshore ?)

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh man, worst-case scenario indeed. Are you serious about this? Do you think it will come to that potentially? I am "prepared for change" as you say, but IDK if I'm prepared to leave the country. Won't players always be able to send in paper checks (personnal or cashier) and then won't the sites always be able to send me a check (assuming all the e-wallets pull out)? I thought I heard someone say once that AG Gonzalez wasnt confident that the UIGEA could be enforced and that paper checks would likely slip through the cracks... is this true? I mean, give me a little hope here. How soon do you think sh*t might hit the fan, if it indeed does? Will the current situation remain the same for at least 6 months? 3 months? Does ANYONE have ANY idea what the future of online poker holds? I mean, how bad is it really gonna get. I scare myself sometimes when I read these threads and cause myself extra stress and worry.

[FreeBeer]

[ QUOTE ]

Won't players always be able to send in paper checks (personnal or cashier) and then won't the sites always be able to send me a check (assuming all the e-wallets pull out)?



[/ QUOTE ]


No. For instance, Sportingbet PLC, owners of Paradise Poker, refuses to issue checks to US citizens, citing the UIGEA as the reason. Getting paid is a stone bitch sometimes. Just ask the FTP and Bodog players.

[Skallagrim]

Just back from vacation folks, and havent read the petition or other legal documents filed yet, but there are a few points I can make:

1) September 4 is hardly unusual as hearing date for this kind of petition - 6-7 weeks is actaully pretty fast for a federal court civil case. I do not know the local rules, but it is pretty clear these guys didnt ask for an "immediate" HEARING.

2) The UIGEA, as I have said many times, is the most poorly drafted piece of federal legislation in some time, what it really says is subject to a lot of debate. What is clear, by its own terms, is that it is not making any particular game or gambliing legal or illegal; it exists to say that if a game is already illegal under STATE OR FEDERAL law, then FUNDING THAT GAME is now a new federal crime.

3) Since poker is not covered by the wire act, whether its illegal to fund online poker under the UIGEA has to be determined by individual state law. This gets extremely complex. Basically, everything other than the laws in Washington and Louisianna can be argued not to apply to online poker (those 2 states specifically make it a crime to play online poker) and even for those 2 states the question exists as to whehter they have the authority to outlaw online play since interstate commerce is supposed to be a federal matter. I am still too tired from the retrun trip to go further into this now.

4) The complexity of a federal law that says your interstate banking activity is either legal or illegal depending on future interpertations of state law is what has everybody going nuts (at least as far as poker is concerned) including the DOJ and the folks who have to write the regulations. The idea that an interstate bank or CC company must know that its OK for JP to play from Missouri (another long and complex interpertation, but pretty safe because poker is a game of skill according to the Missouri Supreme Court, and thus not inherently illegal - the other Missouri laws that ban unregulated for-profit cardrooms clearly only deal with physical places in Missouri) but probably not OK for a guy from South Carolina (where playing any card game for money is illegal) is nuts and will keep an army of lawyers employed for many years.

5) Thus most companies with other profit areas see it as just easy to stop all US transfers to poker sites so that they are sure they can never be held to violate the UIGEA - that does not make play from states like Missouri illegal, yet it effectively stops it. It is this effect on otherwise legal players that may be enough for this lawsuit to get somewhere, similar to ACLU v. Gonzales without the first amendment having to come into play.

Skallagrim

[oldbookguy]

Thanks, this is the clearest, most consise post i have read on this matter.

I think IMEGA could use you!

obg

[niss]

[ QUOTE ]
September 4 is hardly unusual as hearing date for this kind of petition - 6-7 weeks is actaully pretty fast for a federal court civil case. I do not know the local rules, but it is pretty clear these guys didnt ask for an "immediate" HEARING.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is somewhat misleading. Two months is a LONG TIME when someone is seeking a TRO or a preliminary injunction. The problem is, as discussed above, a movant almost always seeks this relief by Order to Show Cause, which they inexplicably didn't do here.

While the rest of your post may make loads of sense, the issue in this thread is less whether the UIGEA can/should be blocked and more the poor effort that IMEGA seems to be making to do so. Read the papers and see if you think otherwise.