The Wire Act Revisited: How the DOJ’s Recent Reinterpretation May Affect Gaming in Nevada
On January 14, 2019, amid the longest-running government shutdown in U.S. history, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) quietly released an opinion that sent shockwaves through the gaming industry. The opinion, dated November 2, 2018, purports to reverse the DOJ’s longstanding interpretation, articulated in its 2011 opinion, that the Wire Act’s prohibitions exclusively apply to interstate gambling activities associated with “sporting events or contests” or, in other words, sports wagering. In stark contrast to the 2011 opinion, the 2018 opinion states that the Wire Act applies to all forms of wagering activity— gambling—that cross state lines. Following the 2011 opinion, numerous states, including Nevada, authorized online gambling in one form or another—online lotteries, online poker and online casino games are now fixtures in multiple jurisdictions across the country. In light of the 2018 opinion, states and industry participants are left to question what the future holds.
Click here to read the entire article.
Recent Insights
Read MoreChina Invokes “Blocking Statute” Framework Ahead of Trump–Xi Summit
Client Alert | May 07, 2026Denver Amends Zoning Code to Possibly Save Thousands of Housing Units with SDP Extension
Client Alert | May 05, 2026FinCEN Proposes Sweeping AML/CFT Reforms: What Casinos Need to Know
Article | May 05, 2026Beyond Billables: How Pro Bono Elevates Big Law
Article | May 05, 2026Nevada’s Middle Path on Non Competes: Revise, Don’t Rewrite
Client Alert | May 04, 2026Expanding Pathways for Thermal Energy and Geothermal Development
You have chosen to send an email to Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck or one of its lawyers. The sending and receipt of this email and the information in it does not in itself create and attorney-client relationship between us.
If you are not already a client, you should not provide us with information that you wish to have treated as privileged or confidential without first speaking to one of our lawyers.
If you provide information before we confirm that you are a client and that we are willing and able to represent you, we may not be required to treat that information as privileged, confidential, or protected information, and we may be able to represent a party adverse to you and even to use the information you submit to us against you.
I have read this and want to send an email.