I agree with ColoradoTree's analysis.
The basic principle is this: Congress can regulate sports gambling itself. But Congress can't dictate to the states which laws the states must pass, or must not pass, on this topic.
Clearly, Congress could ban all sports gambling. The Commerce Clause gives Congress that power. But Congress has not done so, and probably will not do so.
To me, the more interesting question to me is whether Congress has the power to ban sports gambling everywhere except the places where it is currently legal, thus preserving the status quo. Would it be legal for Congress to ban sports gambling in most of the nation, while allowing it in a few selected places?
I suspect that it would. The Supreme Court has said repeatedly that the Commerce Clause does not require uniform regulation across the nation. For example: "Nor does the Commerce Clause impose requirements of geographic uniformity. . . . Congress may devise . . . a national policy with due regard for the varying and fluctuating interests of different regions." Secretary of Agriculture v. Central Roig Refining Co. (1950).
However, I doubt that Congress will impose such a limitation on gambling. The gambling industry is brobdingnagian and has a lot of money to spend on lobbying and campaign donations. (I'm not calling it the gaming industry. It's gambling.) Congress probably will allow each state to make its own decision.
The basic principle is this: Congress can regulate sports gambling itself. But Congress can't dictate to the states which laws the states must pass, or must not pass, on this topic.
Clearly, Congress could ban all sports gambling. The Commerce Clause gives Congress that power. But Congress has not done so, and probably will not do so.
To me, the more interesting question to me is whether Congress has the power to ban sports gambling everywhere except the places where it is currently legal, thus preserving the status quo. Would it be legal for Congress to ban sports gambling in most of the nation, while allowing it in a few selected places?
I suspect that it would. The Supreme Court has said repeatedly that the Commerce Clause does not require uniform regulation across the nation. For example: "Nor does the Commerce Clause impose requirements of geographic uniformity. . . . Congress may devise . . . a national policy with due regard for the varying and fluctuating interests of different regions." Secretary of Agriculture v. Central Roig Refining Co. (1950).
However, I doubt that Congress will impose such a limitation on gambling. The gambling industry is brobdingnagian and has a lot of money to spend on lobbying and campaign donations. (I'm not calling it the gaming industry. It's gambling.) Congress probably will allow each state to make its own decision.