Judge Blocks No-Bid Gambling Contract in D.C. Laws & Regulations

D.C. Superior Court Judge Temporarily Blocks No-Bid Sports Gambling Contract

By Lisa Spencer Senior Editor Updated: 30 September 2019

Lisa Spencer Senior Editor

As a Senior Editor at Betting.US, Lisa Spencer is a valuable member of our expert team. With a Master’s degree in Applied Mathematics, Lisa is adept in gambling theory and analyzing odds. She contributes by writing online sportsbook reviews and finding competitive markets to help our readers make an informed choice.

See Full Bio

On Thursday last week, a Superior Court judge in D.C. blocked the district from moving forward with a contract to manage the city’s planned journey into online sports betting. The contract – which has proved controversial with locals and online gambling experts – came under close scrutiny, and opponents say that it violates federal law because the contract was awarded without competitive bidding.

The lawsuit was filed by Dylan Carragher – the founder of a sports betting technology business and a local resident – and he argued that the city’s $215 million contract with Intralot was not only unfair, but also unlawful.

What Did the Judges Say?

First, let’s look at what the lawsuit alleged. It stated that District officials violated the Home Rule Act by suspending competitive bidding rules for the contract. In layman’s terms, this means that other operators (particularly those who are smaller than Intralot) were unable to place their bids on the project. According to the lawsuit, the CFO’s office must adhere to D.C. procurement laws – and this ensures that firms and operators are allowed to partake in competitive bidding. The lawsuit alleges that the D.C. Council should not have ignored this.

Judge Joan Zeldon – the senior judge presiding over the case – found that there was a ‘substantial likelihood’ that Carragher’s case would prove successful. She believed that there was a good chance the city would be found to have violated federal law – and this is the main reason why she issued the temporary block on the contract.

Donald Temple – the lawyer acting on behalf of Carragher – said that he and his client were ‘pleasantly surprised’ by the ruling, and he went on to call her judgement ‘monumental’. He goes on to state that the city acted illegally by awarding Intralot the contract without allowing other companies to place competitive bids.

He finished by saying that the ‘next stage’ is for the city to determine whether or not they will admit to acting illegally or not. When the District was contacted, they said that they were reviewing the judge’s findings, but refused to issue a statement at this moment in time.

However, Phil Mendelson – the D.C. Council Chairman – believes that (despite the temporary setback) the city will prevail in the end, stating:

“My understanding is that the essence of the judge’s action was to buy time for the parties to brief this and for the court to figure this out. The argument by the plaintiff focuses on an arcane reading of the Home Rule Act, and it’s an incorrect reading.”

Reaction to the judgement has been mixed – but a spokesperson for the D.C. Lottery, Nicole Jordan, said that she fears the ruling will have a negative effect on local businesses. The entire process is just delaying things, she says, and it’s not likely to be before January of 2020 that a firm ruling is made. If the contract is voided at this point, the District will be back to square one.