Legal Question in Technology Law in South Carolina

Re: Gambling

As worded it probably could be deemed unconstitutional,

BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT you cannot take one statute out of context. You must see it in context of the STATUTORY SCHEME of which it is a part.

Alone, a gambler could be sending instructions to his little nephew on betting at home, for instance, which kids is going to win the

Monopoly game.

But if the statute is in the middle of a chapter dedicated only to gambling on the Net where the supposed tru meaning could not be mistaken, then we are looking at a lion and not a tiger.

Get it?

Re: Gambling

If it is a state statute, it may violate the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. Such a statute may burden interstate commerce. A Federal Statute or regulation may run afoul of the Tenth Amendment to United States Constitution which reserves certain rights to the states and people which are not delegated to the Federal Government by the United States Constitution, nor prohibited by the United States Constitution to the states.

Re: Gambling

I bet the proposed statute standing alone is too vague to pay out. I think it throws snake eyes, not box cars. What is a "gambling" business? Are all stock brokers to be illegal? Sounds like it, because they bet and wager on the stock market every day and they use the Internet. Is an email concerning the office football pool illegal? If a casino blackjack dealer gets or sends an email concerning his training schedule for learning betting procedures, he would be illegal. Statutes are often long and complex to provide exceptions where exceptions are needed. I "bet" that your proposed statute, if it would ever pass any legislature, would have to have many definitions and exceptions and would have to be enforced with common sense to stand constitutional muster. I gamble on legal strategy using the internet every day, and it is my business.

Still, I hate those group lotto pop-ups! Keep in mind most of the online casinos are not even in the US so such a statute would be ineffective anyway.