Florida Sports Betting Mandate Officially Issued, But Still No Sports Betting in Sunshine State

• D.C. Circuit Court mandate has been issued to validate a 2021 Florida gaming compact
• The gaming compact legalizes Florida sports betting and roulette, craps at Seminole Tribe casinos
• Despite mandate,  Florida sports betting has yet to launch

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia officially issued its mandate to restore a 2021 gaming compact late Friday, Oct. 6, officially opening a window to launch Florida sports betting in the Sunshine State.

Three days later, another NFL week having largely come and gone, and there still isn’t a whiff of sports betting in the state.

So what’s going on here?

Federal Challenges Likely Holding up Sports Betting

There has been no movement from the Seminole Tribe since the mandate was issued. A spokesperson for the Seminole Tribe told Sports Betting Dime it had nothing more to add or say to the mandate being issued.

Nothing has been officially barring the Seminole Tribe from launching sports betting for the last several months. Many have wondered if the tribe was simply waiting for the D.C. Circuit Court to issue its official mandate to restore the 2021 gaming compact before taking action. The gaming compact, approved in 2021, allows the Seminole Tribe to offer retail and online sports betting, as well as roulette and craps, in its Florida casinos.

The gaming compact granted the Seminole Tribe exclusive rights to online sports betting through a “hub-and-spoke” system, as well as expanded gaming rights, in exchange for at least $2.5 billion over the first five years. The “hub and spoke” system allowed sports bets to be placed anywhere in the state as long as they were processed by computer servers located on tribal land.

However, with West Flagler recently filing a lawsuit with the Florida Supreme Court to invalidate the online sports betting language in the gaming compact, and making its intentions known that it will also petition the Supreme Court to hear its case, it seems as if the Seminole Tribe will be waiting until their conclusion before taking any action on sports betting.

DC Circuit Court issued its mandate reversing the decision to invalidate the 2021 Florida gaming compact (that allows Florida sports betting).

Will see if the Seminole Tribe waits for the federal courts to resolve before launching sports betting.

First reported by @BittGDCG

— RLinnehanXL (@RLinnehanXl) October 6, 2023

West Flagler Associates and Bonita-Fort Meyers Corporation filed a lawsuit with the Florida Supreme Court to invalidate the online sports betting language in the state’s approved 2021 gaming compact with the Seminole Tribe on Monday, Sept. 25, at 11:30 p.m. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) is named as the other party in the petition.

Raquel A. Rodriguez of Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC, counsel representing West Flagler in this Florida Supreme Court petition, wrote that the approved 2021 gaming compact between Florida and the Seminole Tribe, which included online sports betting exclusivity for the Seminole Tribe, violates Amendment 3 of the Florida Constitution. Florida voters approved the amendment in 2018, which declares that voters have the “exclusive right to decide whether to authorize casino gambling in the State of Florida.”

In the petition, West Flagler asserts that the “implementing law” authorizing the off-reservation sports betting provision of the compact expanded casino gambling throughout the state, not just tribal lands.

“Under the Florida Constitution, the people must approve any new casino gambling in the state through the citizens’ initiative process — the off-reservation sports betting provisions of the 2021 compact and the off-reservation portions of the implementing law violate Article X, Section 30 of the Florida Constitution. Neither the governor nor the legislature can expand gambling in Florida in derogation of the people’s constitutional final say,” Rodriguez wrote in the petition.

Florida Supreme Court Lawsuit Moving Forward

The Florida Supreme Court has taken several steps forward with the lawsuit, first issuing a briefing order to Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) on Sept. 29. In the order, DeSantis is requested to file a response by Nov. 1 to West Flagler Associates and Bonita-Fort Meyers Corporation’s lawsuit seeking to invalidate the online sports betting language in the state’s approved 2021 gaming compact with the Seminole Tribe.

The Florida Supreme Court will also allow West Flagler to respond to DeSantis by Nov. 21.

It also acquiesced to a request from No Casinos Inc., an anti-gambling group in the state, to submit an amicus curiae brief to the Florida Supreme Court in support of West Flagler’s lawsuit against online sports betting.

Amicus curiae briefs, or “friend-of-the-court” briefs, are notices written by groups or individuals not directly involved in a legal case, but who could have some expertise or knowledge a court may find useful in making it decision.

In its brief request, counsel for No Casinos Inc. wrote that online sports betting is “contrary” to the Florida Constitution, particularly Amendment 3, and its legalization will conflict with the will of the voters who approved the amendment.

“In contrast, Movant is not trying to protect its own economic interest. Instead, the proposed amicus curiae brief will argue that it is both contrary to the Florida Constitution to allow widespread sports betting on cell phones located throughout the State, under the guise that the servers are located on Indian land, and contrary to the public policy and welfare of this State as evidenced by the voters who approved Amendment 3,” counsel wrote.

Amendment 3, a voter approved 2018 constitutional amendment, requires any new casino gambling laws to be approved by voters. No Casinos Inc. has argued that voters should have the final say on the legality of sports betting being offered in the state.

No Casinos Inc. authored Amendment 3 and fought for its approval alongside the Seminole Tribe and Disney in 2018. Now, No Casinos Inc. and the tribe find themselves on opposite ends of the fight.

SCOTUS Awaits

West  Flagler has also indicated it will seek a writ of certiorari to hear the case with SCOTUS. The plaintiffs have a 90-day window, which began on Sept. 11, to pursue the writ by the Dec. 11 deadline.

It’s not surprising that West Flagler intends to take the issue to SCOTUS. Sports Betting Dime previously spoke with Daniel Wallach, a gaming law attorney, Founder of Wallach Legal and UNHLaw Sports Wagering, who was resolute throughout the process that the plaintiffs would eventually seek to hear the matter at the Supreme Court level.

Wallach believes SCOTUS may provide West Flagler with the best venue to overturn the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision and could potentially be an issue they’d be interested in hearing.

There could be more support in SCOTUS for West Flagler’s legal position in this matter than there was for the D.C. Circuit ruling, he said. The hook, or logic, that the D.C. Circuit used in concluding that the compact addresses internet wagering as a permitted term is “inconsistent with decisions” made by federal appeals courts in the ninth circuit, 10th circuit, and D.C. Circuit.