The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) of 1992: A Misguided Attempt to Regulate Sports Betting

The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) of 1992 was a federal law that attempted to halt the expansion of state-sponsored sports betting in the United States. However, this legislation, championed by major sports leagues and Senator Bill Bradley, ultimately proved to be a misguided effort. By prohibiting states from authorizing sports wagering schemes, PASPA effectively created a near-monopoly for Nevada, thanks to a grandfather clause, while allowing limited exemptions for states like Delaware, Oregon, and Montana for specific lottery-style games.

The Unintended Consequences of PASPA

Despite its intention to protect the integrity of sports, PASPA had the opposite effect. It fueled a massive unregulated black market, involving offshore sportsbooks and local bookies, which operated outside the realm of legal oversight. This not only undermined the law's purpose but also deprived states of significant revenue that could have been generated through regulated sports betting. As noted in the landmark case of *Murphy v. NCAA*, the law's failure to provide a framework for regulated sports betting led to a proliferation of illicit activities, further emphasizing the need for a more nuanced approach.

The Demise of PASPA

The constitutionality of PASPA was challenged by New Jersey, which argued that the law violated the Tenth Amendment's anti-commandeering doctrine by preventing states from modifying their own laws. In a landmark decision, *Murphy v. NCAA*, the Supreme Court struck down PASPA in May 2018, ruling in favor of New Jersey. This decision paved the way for the current state-by-state legalization framework, allowing states to decide for themselves whether to permit sports betting. The ruling was a significant victory for states' rights and a recognition of the failures of PASPA to address the complexities of sports betting.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 was a flawed law that failed to achieve its intended purpose. Instead, it created an unregulated black market and stifled state revenue. The Supreme Court's decision to strike down PASPA has enabled states to take a more nuanced approach to sports betting, one that prioritizes regulation, revenue generation, and consumer protection. As the sports betting landscape continues to evolve, it is essential to recognize the lessons of PASPA and work towards creating a regulatory framework that balances the needs of states, sports leagues, and consumers.