Justice Dept. Fires back in Imega Case

After a United States trade association filed briefs last month challenging the constitutionality of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, the Department of Justice yesterday returned fire.

The Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association has brought its case against the UIGEA to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit after losing its First Amendment challenge in Federal District Court last March.

In appeals court, the association is arguing the UIGEA imposes criminal sanctions without clearly defining a crime. Their argument is therefore based on a concept in constitutional law called void for vagueness, which requires a law to be constructed in such a way as to prevent confusion, by individuals, on how that law applies to them.

Imega, as the association is best known, is not alone in its thinking.

Federal regulators tasked with drafting rules for the UIGEA openly remarked at a congressional hearing in April that "unlawful Internet gambling," as proposed, was unclear enough to merit confusion and significantly delay the rule-writing process.

In its 24-page response brief, the Justice Department countered that the UIGEA is not sufficiently vague as to meet the standard for declaring it unconstitutional.

"The Act prohibits a gambling business from knowingly accepting financial instruments from individuals who place a bet over the Internet if gambling is illegal where (1) the business is located or (2) the individual places the bet," attorneys for the Justice Department wrote. "This straightforward prohibition gives 'people of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to understand what conduct it prohibits.' "

Lawyers for Imega have 15 days in which to file a response to the Justice Department's arguments. A three-judge panel will then decide when oral arguments will be heard.

IGN's Take

If the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve Board don't understand the definition of "unlawful Internet gambling," what reasonable hope can the Justice Department have that those of "ordinary intelligence" will?

Click here to view a copy of the Justice Department's response brief.