The Florida Model: A Regulatory Framework for Sports Betting

Introduction

The 2021 Compact between Florida and the Seminole Tribe has established a unique regulatory framework for sports betting, known as the Florida Model. This model is characterized by a 'Hub-and-Spoke' system, which grants the Tribe a monopoly on mobile sports betting. From a regulatory perspective, this framework is noteworthy for its innovative approach to jurisdictional issues, particularly with regards to the 'Deemed to Occur' clause.

Key Components

'Deemed to Occur' Clause

A crucial provision of the Florida Model is the 'Deemed to Occur' Clause, which states that a mobile bet placed anywhere in Florida is legally considered to have taken place on Tribal land, where the servers (the Hub) are located. This clause has significant implications for the regulation of sports betting in the state, as it effectively allows the Tribe to maintain control over all mobile betting activities. According to the DC Circuit's ruling in West Flagler Associates v. Haaland, this approach is permissible under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), as long as it is authorized by state law.

IGRA Interpretation

The DC Circuit's interpretation of IGRA in West Flagler Associates v. Haaland has significant implications for the Florida Model. By permitting Compacts to include provisions for off-reservation gaming, the court has effectively bifurcated the source of legal authority, allowing the Compact to stand. This interpretation provides a roadmap for other Tribal-heavy states to implement similar regulatory frameworks, potentially shaping the future of sports betting regulation in the United States.

Monopolistic Control

The Florida Model's grant of monopolistic control to the Tribe has significant implications for the sports betting market. By locking out commercial operators, such as DraftKings and FanDuel, unless they act as marketing partners for the Tribe, the model consolidates all liquidity and risk management under the Hard Rock Bet brand. This approach has the potential to create a more stable and regulated market, but also raises concerns about competition and consumer choice.

Implications

The Florida Model provides a unique approach to sports betting regulation, one that prioritizes Tribal control and state authorization. As other states consider their own regulatory frameworks, the Florida Model is likely to be closely watched. With its emphasis on jurisdictional clarity and monopolistic control, this model has the potential to shape the future of sports betting regulation in the United States, particularly in Tribal-heavy states such as California and Oklahoma.