The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit is upholding a lower court ruling that the New Hampshire Lottery Commission can continue to sell lottery tickets online, despite a challenge by the Trump Administration.
The case centers on an opinion released by the Department of Justice in 2018 that found online lottery ticket sales violated the Wire Act, which was signed into law in 1961. The Office of Legal Counsel’s decision was a reversal of its own 2011 memo that cleared the way for online lottery sales.
New Hampshire, which launched online lottery sales based on the 2011 guidelines, filed a legal challenge to the federal government in federal court. NeoPollard Interactive, which the N.H. Lottery Commission contracts to provide online lottery gaming, also joined the suit.
Are 13 Current Cabinet Members Unconstitutional? SHARE
By the time Joe Biden was inaugurated as the 46th president yesterday, every member of President Trump’s cabinet had resigned. That’s customary when a new president takes office. Because none of President Biden’s nominees to fill his cabinet have yet been confirmed by the Senate, all fifteen cabinet‐level departments are currently being led by “acting secretaries.” These acting secretaries serve either by virtue of succession statutes specific to particular departments or by virtue of the “Vacancies Act,” a law that gives the president broad discretion to fill vacancies across the federal government with “acting officers” (but places time limits on their service).
Newsroom
Howard Stutz, CDC Gaming Reports ·
January 20, 2021 at
4:10 pm
A Federal Circuit Court Wednesday rejected the Justice Department’s 2019 decision to revise the Federal Wire Act, agreeing with a lower court in New Hampshire that the 1961 law relates only to interstate sports betting.
The ruling by the First Circuit Court of Appeals favored the case brought by the New Hampshire Lottery, which sought to vacate the 23-page opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.
The opinion, dated Nov. 2, 2018, reversed a 2011 ruling on the Wire Act that said the law only pertained to sports betting. The revised decision said the Wire Act covers any action where gaming information is transmitted over the Internet.
Land Shark Shredding, LLC v. US, Nos. 20-1230 and 20-1231 (187 days).
Shortest pending case from argument (non-Rule 36):
Case of the week:
Panel: Judges Lourie, Clevenger, and Chen, with Judge Clevenger writing the opinion
You should read this case if: you’re interested in the separation of powers and statutory interpretation or you have a case with a waiver issue
Our case of the week is not your typical bid protest. This one is unusually interesting for reasons both academic (the separation of powers) and practical (the law of waiver).
The dispute concerns a printing contract. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) wanted to print information about suicide prevention on gun locks. To find a vendor, it enlisted the Government Printing Office (GPO) to run a solicitation. The VA did so against the backdrop of a statute which the Court calls the “printing mandate” providing that “[a]ll printing” for executive agencies shall be done through the GPO. 4