Written by: Dean Micknal
Researched by: Eric Wasik
Edited by: Darci G. Van Duzer
Managing Editor: Lauren E. Trent

A great American philosopher once advised, “You gotta know when to hold ‘em, know when to fold ‘em.” The deck certainly looks stacked against the online gambling industry. Last Wednesday the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve issued new rules that give the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (”UIGEA”) a pretty sharp set of teeth. The new regulations hit the online gambling industry where it hurts-the wallet.  Financial institutions will be required to identify and block payments related to unlawful Internet gambling starting December 1, 2009.

Criticism has been sharp, with opponents lambasting the law as a sneaky bit of midnight legislating and warning that it could damage everything from the still-reeling banking industry, to individual constitutional rights, to international trade relations. Of particular concern to opponents of the law is the fact that the UIGEA doesn’t even try to define what “unlawful internet gambling” means. The Act expressly avoids “spell[ing] out which acts are legal and which are illegal, but rather relies on underlying substantive federal and state laws.” This puts the onus on financial institutions to interpret and enforce a widely divergent and ambiguous set of laws, using payment systems that officials acknowledge are generally not designed to comply with the new law.

Of course none of this might matter if Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear gets his way. You see, Kentucky owns the internet. Well, at least parts of it.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by: Tracy Frazier
Researched by: Casey King
Edited by: Adam Gottlieb
Managing Editor: Mary Anne Nash

In the midst of the excitement and revelry surrounding the election of our 44^th president, the success of California’s Proposition 8 was easily lost in the commotion. However, for many, the passage of Proposition 8 damped their excitement over this otherwise historic election. Proposition 8 defines marriage as exclusively between one man and one woman, and was spurred by conservative reaction to a recent California Supreme Court decision. In the May 2008 case In re Marriage Cases, the California Supreme Court struck down the state’s ban on gay marriage in a 4-3 ruling.

California, like many states, has a long and tumultuous history with gay marriage. In 2005, the state legislature passed the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act. This act would have ensured equal treatment under the law by making marriage a gender-neutral contract, thus allowing same-sex couples to marry in California. Governor Schwarzenegger quickly vetoed the bill. The legislature passed the bill again in 2007, this time by an even wider margin. Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill a second time. This time he declared that the California Supreme Court should weigh in, and that he would respect the court’s decision.

The judges in In re Marriages concluded that allowing opposite-sex couples to marry, while only allowing same-sex couples domestic partnerships, improperly infringed on homosexuals’ constitutional right to marry and to the equal protection of the law. In an opinion authored by Chief Justice Ronald George, the court stated that marriage was a basic, fundamental right, guaranteed to all Californians.

California was not the first state to protect gay marriage through a state supreme court decision-Massachusetts has previously done so, and, in October, Connecticut followed suit. Both interpreted their state constitution as providing for equal protection, thus prohibiting the state from withholding a constitutionally protected right from a group of citizens.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by: Jeff W. Richards
Researched by: Peter Fehrs and Casey King
Managing Editor: Brady Iandiorio

These days, it seems like Americans have to hand over their Social Security Numbers (SSN) every time they turn around. From job or rental applications to buying a house, the SSN has become the de facto way of proving that you are you. With such an infusion into everyday life, the dissemination of SSNs is progressively harder to curb and not surprisingly, things frequently go awry. Identity theft is an increasing problem in the modern world of computers and lightning-fast transactions, and rising public awareness has led to efforts by various governments to respond to the problem.

Sounds good, right? Unfortunately, the government frequently gets it wrong… In the case below, the right hand hasn’t got a clue what the left hand is doing. State legislators have passed a new law in Virginia to try and address the problem, but they may have taken aim at the wrong target.

  Read the rest of this entry »