Equal Protection Argument
Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2015 7:49 am
The Fanduel complaint against the Illinois AG makes, among other things, a claim that the AG has violated Equal Protection by treating DFS differently than season long. This is a guaranteed loser in the sense that that the distinction would be considered under rational basis analysis (under which almost everything passes), but is further evidence that it is every man for himself in the fantasy world. It also tells me that any hope DFS has is with the legislatures, where relief will come at a high cost.
To me, the best argument in favor of the legality of season long fantasy under the current statutes (and a winner to boot) is this: the state legislatures thought they were making something legal when they passed their statutes in this area: if the statutes weren't legalizing season long fantasy, what were they doing?
I guess I would be concerned that if DFS does get legislative relief that it doesn't come under some regimen that is workable for DFS, but applies to (and screws over) season long.
To me, the best argument in favor of the legality of season long fantasy under the current statutes (and a winner to boot) is this: the state legislatures thought they were making something legal when they passed their statutes in this area: if the statutes weren't legalizing season long fantasy, what were they doing?
I guess I would be concerned that if DFS does get legislative relief that it doesn't come under some regimen that is workable for DFS, but applies to (and screws over) season long.