Case 1:25-cv-02152-ESK-MJS Document 15 Filed 04/18/25 Page 49 of 51 PageID: 170
n.17 (2018) (explaining that the State’s “inability to enforce its duly enacted plans clearly inflicts irreparable harm on the State”). But the harm to the State and therefore to the public stretches well beyond this general principle. That’s because New Jersey has an especially strong inter- est in overseeing the acceptance of sports wagers in the State and reducing the social costs associated with gambling. See Greater New Orleans Broad. Ass’n, Inc. , 527 U.S. at 185 (“reducing the social costs associated with ‘gambling’” is a sub- stantial interest). For instance, the Act ensures that operators are financially sta- ble and can cover outstanding sports wagers. N.J. Stat. Ann. § 5:12A-13(a); N.J. Admin. Code § 13:69N-1.2(d). And the Act requires that participants in sports wagers are at least twenty-one years old, protecting minors from gaming. N.J. Admin. Code § 13:69O-1.2. An injunction would prevent the State from exer- cising its historic police powers to protect the interests of its citizens. See Casino Ventures v. Stewart , 183 F.3d 307, 310 (4th Cir. 1999) (gambling “restrictions are aimed at promoting the welfare, safety, and morals of [state residents],” so “they represent a well-recognized exercise of state police power”). And it would pre- vent the State from collecting a licensure fee from Kalshi and taxing the gross revenues from the sports wagers Kalshi accepts in the State. See N.J. Stat. Ann. § 5:12A-16. A portion of that fee is used to fund “prevention, education, and treatment programs for compulsive gambling,” id. , and the taxes are used to pro- vide vital services for eligible senior citizens and residents with disabilities, id. § 5:12-145(c), which promote the health and welfare of New Jerseyans.
39
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs