And yet another group has thrown its hat into the ring.
No Casinos Inc., an anti-gambling group in Florida, requested it be allowed 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.
The Florida Supreme Court will have to agree to the request before No Casinos Inc. can submit a brief.
Online Sports Betting Contrary to Florida Constitution
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.
No Casinos, Inc., has perhaps the longest history of active participation in related issues, and an establish concern that this State not be overrun with gambling, forever changing the appearance, attitude, and atmosphere of Florida, such that gambling becomes as pervasive as palm trees. Sports betting that would take Indian gaming off the reservation and into everyone’s hand-held device cannot be squared with the will of the people who voted for Amendment 3, and No Casinos, Inc., would assist the Court in seeing how those policy concerns undergird and support the legal arguments, as set forth in the Petition, counsel wrote in the request.
The group missed the Oct. 6 deadline for amicus curiae briefs, set for 10 days after the Sept. 26 West Flagler lawsuit filing, and is requesting the court grant later service. No Casinos Inc. is requesting it be allowed to file it brief within 10 days of the court granting the motion.
Gov. DeSantis Responds
Legal counsel for Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) submitted a response to No Casinos Inc. s request, opposing the motion. However, the state would not oppose granting No Casinos Inc. the chance to file a brief if they are granted the same time extension to be able to file a response.
Respondents do, however, oppose No Casinos’ request for an extension of time within which to file an amicus brief. In support of that request, No Casinos states only that filing a timely brief on the ordinary schedule contemplated by the rules “is not feasible.” Mot. 1. Even so, Respondents would not oppose granting No Casinos additional time within which to file if Respondents received a corresponding extension of time to file their response, counsel wrote.
The courts must now weigh before requests.
Florida Supreme Court Timeline
West Flagler filed its lawsuit on Sept. 26 and the Florida Supreme Court 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.
No Casinos Inc. believes if the court allows their motion to submit an amicus brief it would give the state ample time to address it before the Nov. 1 deadline.
