About this app
How to play Dice Deco
Polymarket and other prediction markets that ventured into sports trading last year maintain that they’re financial platforms governed by federal law.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) agrees, continuing to defend its claimed “exclusive jurisdiction” over sports prediction markets in federal and state courts across the nation.
The legal wrangling extends to Michigan, where Attorney General Dana Nessel has rejected Polymarket and the CFTC’s arguments that the Michigan Gaming Control Board has no regulatory authority over prediction markets, even the ones allowing traders to buy and sell shares of sports outcomes.
How to play Dice Deco
Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”
Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.
IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”
About Dice Deco
Stevenson Starks shared those concerns that the NCAA has towards online sports betting in the U.S.:
“The two [concerns] are the integrity of athletic competition, and how that could potentially be impacted by a proliferation of legalized sports wagering. And then the second is really the health and well-being of student athletes.“
Stevenson added that the NCAA is determined to keep local student organisations informed of key regulations.
