UIGEA to be Challenged by iMEGA

harry_lime · Last edited by harry_lime on Wed Sep 02, 2009 5:42 pm; edited 1 time in total

A potentially very important date coming up which could have a major bearing on the overturning of the US ban. Well worth noting in your calendars - harry

UIGEA Appeal Judges Named, July 7th Date for Oral Arguments
June 23, 2009 - Taken from iMega.org

The US 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals today announced that it will hear oral arguments from lawyers representing the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association (iMEGA) and the US Department of Justice (US DoJ), as part of a court challenge by iMEGA against the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). Arguments will be heard on July 7th at 10:00 am, at the US Courthouse In Philadelphia, PA.

The three-judge panel that will decide the case was also announced: Judge Dolores Korman Sloviter, a Carter appointee; Judge Thomas L. Ambro, a Clinton appointee; and Judge Kent A. Jordan, a George W. Bush appointee.

iMEGA will be represented by Eric M. Bernstein, who first argued to have UIGEA overturned in US District Court, and Stephen A. Saltzburg, professor at the George Washington University school of law and former deputy attorney-general of the United States.

The defendants - the US Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Reserve - will be represented by Nicholas J. Bagley and Jacqueline E. Coleman of the US DoJ’s civil division in Washington, DC.

“This law will finally have to stand on it’s own two feet in court, free from politics and all other outside influences,” said iMEGA chairman Joe Brennan Jr. “We feel very confident that when the judges take a look at the law, they will see just how defective it is, and they will overturn it.”
_________________

Alternate Poker4ever League Winner Award

"I guess nobody really knew Harry like he did ...like I did !"

....harry "the negotiator" lime

addam00 · Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:28 am Post subject:

I hope one of the judges is a poker player

_________________
Can you spare a medal? I need another medal

Miklosik · Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:31 pm Post subject:

This won't be the first time that Saltzburg has taken on the US govt. Common belief is that you cannot sue our govt. but saltzburg has been somewhat successful in doing just that when there is no parallel private party to be held accountable.

Coleman, on the other hand, has argued for the govt, with her own sucesses. Neither side is throwing any rookies at this issue. This is going to be very interesting.

Hopefully, I will find time to research a bit on the judges hearing this case to try to determine their leanings.
_________________

Newest and oldest member of the Mura-harem.

harry_lime · Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:45 pm Post subject:

Miklosik · Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 2:03 pm Post subject:

well, alrighty then. So far, I've dug just a bit into Judge Sloviter, and it ain't pretty.

the general concensus about her, by her collegues and her employees, is that she is an illiterate, inept sociopath.

if I try to focus strictly on her rulings and ignore public opinion, this is what i find.

no whiff of new precedent will ever cross her gavel. It will be shoved to the Supreme Court before she ever interprets law in any kind of innovative way. She will not make a decision on any case that does not already have a resolved case similar in nature to base an opinion.

I get the feeling that Civil Rights are not her forte.

This is going to be kind of fun I think.

I'll be back when I know more.
_________________

Newest and oldest member of the Mura-harem.

Miklosik · Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 2:11 pm Post subject:

Miklosik · Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 4:48 pm Post subject:

If we can make reasonable arguement that poker is a game of skill, i.e. a sport, I believe we will have Ambro on our side.
_________________

Newest and oldest member of the Mura-harem.

kpjdjcj · Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:12 pm Post subject:

where the problem comes in is there is no way to tell what the deck has instore for you so as much as we would all like to call this 100% skill it is impossable to do that. my brake down of it comes as 70% skill 20% luck and 10% bs lets just hope that the judges agree that there is enough luck in it.

Miklosik · Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:42 pm Post subject:

a batter doesn't know the next pitch to come so sometimes he swings and misses and sometimes he gets lucky and makes contact. Then he may get even luckier if the ball is not fielded cleanly and actually reach a base.

A quarterback calls a play and if he's lucky, that play produces results. The defense calls their own play and if they are lucky, it will produce the desired result.

In each case, a bit of luck is involved. Skill is by far the main ingredient in any sport but luck plays a part in all of them.
_________________

Newest and oldest member of the Mura-harem.

harry_lime · Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:50 pm Post subject:

in terms of the skill question, the Pennsylvania ruling may well add weight to that particular debate :

http://alternate-poker-forum.com/about4296.html
_________________

"I guess nobody really knew Harry like he did ...like I did !"

....harry "the negotiator" lime

kpjdjcj · Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 10:58 pm Post subject:

than incurs for the 20% luck witch is pretty much actually a part of every day living my family tells me that i have a bit of luck or am touched by an angel

but i just think i'm nuts

jolub · Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:28 am Post subject:

This is what we've all been waiting for.
_________________

addam00 · Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:37 am Post subject:

I will thinb it wilol be aniother year till we get thinngs straight out and once we do I thinbk itrs gonna be up to each state..
_________________
Can you spare a medal? I need another medal

harry_lime · Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2009 8:19 am Post subject:

Update

Yesterday iMEGA was in appelate court to repeal the UIGEA, calling it unconstitutional. Apparantly it was not the greatest of starts and we're probably in for a long haul befire a decision is reached.
_________________

"I guess nobody really knew Harry like he did ...like I did !"

....harry "the negotiator" lime

kpjdjcj · Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2009 8:00 pm Post subject:

just remember the proabition of wisky that to came to an end and so will the ban on cards

Arjonius · Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 1:41 pm Post subject:

Afaik, there is no federal ban on playing poker. The UIGEA targets money movement including but not limited to poker.

kesza · Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 3:22 am Post subject:

My opinion on this subject is very simple. Governments wants money from their citizens. Money for everything, anything, something. "Oooh, so you have money?? GIVE ME SOME OF THAT! Give me your money, no matter why!" It's simple, it's not much different of what mafia does as money for defense. It's the same procedure. You just have to create a law for that, and that makes you legal, you can take that money from people who are just like children, who are just playing what they like - poker. It's easy. But, how can we stop this? Can we stop this one-sided behavior anyhow?
_________________

kpjdjcj · Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:39 pm Post subject:

they want money but what they also want is countroll if it was just money they could set up a web site threw the us for deposits and withdrawls so every thing could be taxed but they want to say who when and where we play. how meny rades have we all heard about for playing poker in homes or other places. COUNTROL is what they want of everything

harry_lime · Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 5:42 pm Post subject:

Important to read the whole thing as Imega may have found a loophole which may at least help some states in the U.S. to allow internet gambling freely - harry

UIGEA Upheld by US 3rd Circuit, but States Determine i-Gaming Legal Status
Published by imega.org Sept. 1, 2009

The US 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) of 2006, rejecting arguments that the law was vague and intruded on individual privacy rights. The law was challenged by the Washington, DC-based trade association Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association (iMEGA), on the behalf of the Internet gambling industry.

In their decision, the judges clarified that the legality of Internet gambling transactions depended on state law where the bettor was located, and the laws where the betting operator was located. The court emphasized that UIGEA did not establish a blanket Federal ban on Internet gambling.

“It bears repeating that the Act itself does not make any gambling activity illegal,” wrote Judge Dolores Sloviter. “Whether the transaction…constitutes unlawful Internet gambling turns on how the law of the state from which the bettor initiates the bet would treat that bet, i.e. if it is illegal under that state’s law, it constitutes “unlawful Internet gambling” under the Act.”

Joe Brennan Jr., iMEGA’s chairman, said that while the association’s members were disappointed that the court did not overturn the law, they felt there was a silver lining to the court’s ruling.

“The court made it clear - gambling on the Internet is unlawful where state law says so. But there are only a half-dozen states which have laws against Internet gambling, leaving 44 states where it is potentially lawful. It’s not perfect, but it’s a good start.”

Brennan also noted that, in deferring to state law, the court’s decision is consistent with traditional gambling law in the US. “States have always held the power to regulate gambling in this country, not the Federal government. The court’s ruling seems to say ‘back to the future’ when it comes to regulating Internet gambling, so we will turn our attention to the states to make the case that this industry can be properly regulated and produce badly needed tax revenue.”

Brennan also said iMEGA’s legal team would review the ruling and make recommendations on a possible appeal.
_________________

"I guess nobody really knew Harry like he did ...like I did !"

....harry "the negotiator" lime

HOUSECATS · Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:51 pm Post subject:

Don't sound good for my state. Guess I will have to find a way around it.
_________________

GOOD LUCK ALL

Miklosik · Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:07 am Post subject:

I'm still screwed.
_________________

Newest and oldest member of the Mura-harem.

harry_lime · Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:23 am Post subject:

	ALTERNATE POKER FORUM Forum Index -> Online Poker Rooms -> Online Poker Ban - US & Other	All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1	View posts since last visit