Are Daily Fantasy Sports Gambling?

Tomorrow is Thanksgiving, and Thanksgiving means football, and football nowadays means an endless parade of advertisements for DraftKings, FanDuel, and other daily fantasy sports businesses. This post asks the obvious question: are these contests illegal gambling?

What are daily fantasy sports? In case you haven’t seen the commercials, Wikipedia summarizes daily fantasy sports as follows:

[P]layers compete against others by building a team of professional athletes from a particular league or competition, and earn points based on the actual statistical performance of the players in real-world competitions . . . over short-term periods, such as a week or single day . . . . [U]sers pay an entry fee in order to participate, and build a team of players in a certain sport while complying with a salary cap. Depending on their overall performance, players may win a share of a pre-determined pot. Entry fees help fund prizes, while a portion of the entry fee goes to the provider as rake-off revenue.

Gambling is illegal. In North Carolina, G.S. 14-292 makes it a crime to bet on a “game of chance.” Other states have similar laws.

The argument that daily fantasy sports are gambling. Although sports like football may be games of skill, courts view the activity of betting on them as being a game of chance rather than one of skill. State v. Brown, 221 N.C. 301 (1942) (holding that betting on horse racing is gambling). And if betting on sports is a game of chance, the argument goes, it doesn’t matter whether one is betting on individual athletes’ performances rather than teams. Thus, opinion leaders like the New York Times have argued that daily fantasy sports are gambling and should be regulated as such.

The argument that this isn’t gambling. The website of DraftKings, one of the two largest daily fantasy sports operators in the United States, puts it simply: “Daily fantasy sports is a skill game and is not considered gambling.” Or, as a Draft Kings executive said to ESPN, “Our product is a game of skill. In order to be successful, you need to apply your skill in order to have the best lineups to go into our contests to win.” The best evidence of this is also a cautionary signal for would-be participants: a small number of players account for almost all the winnings.

Of course, many games involve both luck and skill, and daily fantasy sports certainly fall in that category. In North Carolina, as in most states, the key question is whether skill or chance predominates. Poker, for example, involves both skill and chance, but courts generally have said that chance predominates. Joker Club, LLC v. Hardin, 183 N.C. App. 92 (2007).

Are daily fantasy sports excluded from the federal gambling laws? Proponents of daily fantasy sports sometimes argue that federal law permits such contests. The law in question is the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, a portion of which excludes from the definition of “bet or wager” certain “fantasy or simulation sports game[s].” There is some debate about the precise scope and meaning of this exemption, as discussed in this Legal Blitz article, but it at least tends to support the idea that federal law does not prohibit this type of activity.

Other states are taking sides. The federal law discussed above expressly states that it does not preempt state gambling laws, and several states have taken action in connection with daily fantasy sports, including Nevada (which determined that daily fantasy sports constitute gambling and so require a license); New York (where the Attorney General has determined that daily fantasy sports constitute gambling and has ordered the leading operators to cease doing business in the state), and Massachusetts (where the Attorney General has declared that daily fantasy sports constitute gambling but has announced a proposal to regulate, rather than prohibit, the contests).

What about North Carolina? WRAL has this article on the legal status of daily fantasy sports in the Tar Heel State. As far as the article reports, and as far as I know, no court or other official body has opined on the issue here, and it doesn’t sound like the Attorney General is keen to join the fray: “North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper said his office will only get involved if a district attorney asks for guidance as to whether it’s illegal gambling.”

The bottom line. I’ve never played any fantasy sport, daily or otherwise, and I certainly don’t claim any special expertise on the gambling laws. Having said that, it is hard for me to see a legal difference between poker and daily fantasy sports. But there may be a practical difference. Daily fantasy sports have the financial and political backing of the NBA, Major League Baseball, ESPN, and Fox Sports among others. Given that lineup of heavyweights, I wouldn’t be surprised to see some compromise emerge.

The 300-Foot Rule Goes to Church

Last week the court of appeals decided another case involving the sex offender premises restriction in G.S. 14-208.18. The defendant was convicted of being within 300 feet of a church preschool. Continue reading

Field Sobriety Testing and the Fifth Amendment

Most drivers stopped on suspicion of impaired driving are asked to submit to field sobriety tests before they are arrested.  Those tests often include the three standardized tests, which researchers have found to enhance officers’ ability to accurately identify impairment:  the one-leg stand, the walk-and-turn, and the horizontal gaze nystagmus tests. Officers sometimes use other types of field tests that have not been validated, such as asking participants to recite the alphabet or to conduct counting exercises. Evidence gained from any of these pre-arrest tests may be admitted against the defendant at trial without running afoul of the Fifth Amendment right to be free from self-incrimination.  That’s because suspects aren’t in custody for purposes of the Fifth Amendment or Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) when they are temporarily detained for a traffic stop and are asked a moderate number of stop-related questions. Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420, 440 (1984); State v. Braswell, 222 N.C. App. 176 (2012). But what if the suspect is asked to perform field sobriety tests after he is arrested?  Must he first be provided Miranda warnings? Continue reading

News Roundup

This week, the mighty fell. Locally, Dana Cope, the former director of the State Employees Association of North Carolina, pled guilty to spending $570,000 of the Association’s money on personal expenses, like landscaping, flying lessons, a trip to China, a home theater system, clothing, and much more. During his court appearance, Cope acknowledged “I am a thief.” He received a sentence of 58 to 82 months in prison. WRAL has the story here. Nationally, Subway spokesman Jared Fogle was sentenced to 15.5 years in federal prison after admitting he possessed child pornography and had sex with minors. The sentence exceeded prosecutors’ recommendation of 12.5 years. Fogle will also pay $1.4 million in restitution. Reuters has the details here. Continue reading

Category: Uncategorized | Tags:

Recent Changes to the Pretrial Release Statutes

In the 2015 legislative session, the General Assembly made two significant changes to the pretrial release statutes: (1) it effectively repealed a “bond doubling” provision for defendants rearrested while on pretrial release, and (2) it expanded the scope of the 48-hour rule for domestic violence cases to include dating couples. Continue reading

More About Those Weird DWI Motions Procedures

You represent a defendant charged with DWI. You move to suppress evidence in district court. The district court enters a preliminary determination in your favor. The State appeals. The superior court disagrees with the district court and remands the case with instructions to deny your motion. Your client pleads guilty. You appeal to superior court. You want the court of appeals to consider the merits of your motion. What should you do to preserve that right?

Continue reading

Is North Carolina the Only State in Which the Prosecutor Controls the Calendar?

I was on a panel about criminal case calendaring yesterday at the Courts Commission. While talking to people in preparation for the event, I kept hearing one thing: that North Carolina is the only state in which the prosecutor controls the calendar. After conducting some research, I don’t think that’s quite right. Continue reading

Habitualized Sex Crimes

Suppose a defendant is convicted of a Class F–I felony that requires registration as a sex offender. He is also convicted as a habitual felon. When sentencing the defendant as a habitual felon, the court obviously will select a minimum sentence appropriate for an offense that is four classes higher than the underlying felony. But what maximum sentence should the court impose? Should it use the regular maximum sentence from G.S. 15A-1340.17(e), or the elevated sex offender maximum from subsection (f)? Continue reading

News Roundup

A divided North Carolina Supreme Court decided State v. Packingham last Friday, upholding the statutory ban on registered sex offenders using social networking websites that allow minors to join. G.S. 14-202.5. The defendant argued that the statute violated his First Amendment rights, but the court ruled that the statute targets conduct, not speech, and that any incidental burden on speech is justifiable. A law professor’s skeptical analysis of the decision is here. Another professor’s suggestion that the case may merit review by the United States Supreme Court is here. Continue reading

Category: Uncategorized | Tags:

Is Paddling a Student a Crime?

On the first day of elementary school each year, our teacher displayed her paddle, which was wooden with a short, solid handle. The paddle portion had holes drilled through its core.  Most school years, someone (always a boy, in my recollection), wound up being paddled. Times have changed for most students. But because a handful of schools in North Carolina still employ corporal punishment, questions continue to arise regarding when such punishment crosses the line between permissible school discipline and unlawful assault.  Continue reading