- The Florida Supreme Court has denied West Flagler’s writ of quo warranto
- West Flagler Associates’ writ of quo warranto attempted to strip the online sports betting language out of the state’s 2021 gaming compact
- The U.S. Supreme Court still looms large for Florida’s online sports betting future
The Florida Supreme Court has officially denied West Flagler’s petition for writ of quo warranto to strip the online sports betting language out of the state’s 2021 gaming compact.
The Court officially denied West Flagler’s petition, citing the relief of what is being asked is beyond the scope of what quo warranto could provide.
“Ultimately, the relief that Petitioners seek is beyond what quo warranto provides. We have never used the writ to test the substantive constitutionality of a statute, and we decline Petitioners’ implicit invitation to expand the scope of the writ here. To do so would serve as an affront to an essential feature of quo warranto—that it is used to challenge the authority to exercise a state power rather than the merits of the action,” the court wrote in its decision.
End of the Road for Florida Supreme Court
This marks the end of the Florida Supreme Court’s role in the fight for Florida online sports betting. West Flagler Associates and Bonita-Fort Meyers Corporation filed its lawsuit with the court on Monday, Sept. 25, attempting to invalidate the online sports betting language in the state’s approved 2021 gaming compact with the Seminole Tribe.
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 asserted that the “implementing law” authorizing the off-reservation sports betting provision of the compact expanded casino gambling throughout the state, not just tribal lands.
The Florida Supreme Court ultimately decided that it could not issue “the extraordinary writ of quo warranto” for this matter.
“But quo warranto is not, and has never been, the proper vehicle to obtain a declaration as to the substantive constitutionality of an enacted law. For that reason, we deny the petition because the relief that Petitioners seek is beyond what the writ of quo warranto provides,” the court noted.
The court’s decision, however, did not touch on the merits of whether online sports betting is in violation of Amendment 3, which requires voters to approve any and all new “casino gambling” expansion.
Daniel Wallach, a gaming law attorney, Founder of Wallach Legal and UNHLaw Sports Wagering, noted on his X feed today the lack of a decision on Amendment 3 could open up further judicial avenues for West Flagler in the state.
Because this decision does not address the merits of whether the state’s online sports betting law violates Florida Amendment 3, West Flagler could still raise the constitutional challenge in Leon County Circuit Court. https://t.co/AlZweBEVA5
— Daniel Wallach (@WALLACHLEGAL) March 21, 2024
While this is win for the Seminole Tribe and its online sports betting future, a U.S. Supreme Court decision still looms large in the state.
U.S. Supreme Court Decision On Horizon
The ultimate fight for Florida’s online sports betting future still lies with SCOTUS. West Flagler Associates submitted its writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court in December, asking the court to consider the legality of a gaming compact that legalizes online sports betting off tribal lands.
West Flagler contends the gaming compact between Florida and the Seminole Tribe that authorizes an online sports betting monopoly for the tribe is in violation of the Florida constitution and the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). Florida and the Seminole Tribe approved the 30-year gaming compact in 2021, granting the tribe exclusive retail and online sports betting rights in the state.
The Secretary of the Interior allowed the compact to be approved under IGRA and the D.C. Circuit upheld the approval in 2023.
Hamish Hume, legal counsel for West Flagler Associates, presented three questions for SCOTUS to consider in the writ of certiorari.
- Whether IGRA authorizes the approval of a compact that purports to allow for an online sports gambling monopoly throughout the state and off Indian lands
- Whether an IGRA compact violates the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) if it provides for internet sports betting that is unlawful where many of the bets are placed
- Whether the Secretary’s approval of a tribal state compact violates equal protection principles where it provides a specific tribe with a monopoly on online sports gaming off tribal lands, while state law makes that conduct a felony for everyone else
SCOTUS will likely not grant or deny West Flagler’s writ of certiorari until later this year.
If SCOTUS denies the petition, that would be the end of the road for West Flagler with the court. However, if it decides to accept the petition, a final ruling on Florida online sports betting would likely not come until sometime in late 2025.
In a recent decision, the Florida Supreme Court ruled against West Flagler Associates in a case involving online sports betting. The ruling is a significant blow to the company, which had been seeking to expand its operations in the state.
The case centered around a 2018 constitutional amendment that legalized sports betting in Florida. West Flagler, which operates the Magic City Casino in Miami, had argued that the amendment allowed for online sports betting, while state regulators maintained that it only permitted betting at physical locations.
In a 6-1 decision, the court sided with the regulators, stating that the language of the amendment was clear in its intent to limit sports betting to brick-and-mortar establishments. The majority opinion emphasized that the amendment was meant to regulate and tax sports betting in a controlled manner, and that allowing online betting would undermine those efforts.
The ruling is a setback for West Flagler, which had been hoping to capitalize on the growing popularity of online sports betting. The company had already invested significant resources in developing an online platform and had been preparing to launch its services in the state.
The decision is also likely to have broader implications for the sports betting industry in Florida. Other companies that had been considering entering the online market may now have to reassess their plans, while regulators will need to clarify their enforcement of the amendment.
Overall, the ruling highlights the complex legal and regulatory landscape surrounding sports betting in Florida. While the industry continues to grow and evolve, companies will need to navigate a patchwork of laws and regulations to ensure compliance and success in this rapidly expanding market.
