"Unlicensed, unregulated, illegal Internet gambling poses a tremendous threat to the citizens of the Commonwealth because of its ease, availability and anonymity," said Beshear back then. "The owners and operators of these illegal sites prey on Kentucky citizens, including our youth, and deprive the Commonwealth of millions of dollars in revenue.  It’s an underworld wrought with scams and schemes."

The Kentucky Supreme Court is expected to make a decision on the case in a set of decisions on January 21.

Beshear has seen a fair amount of criticism for the move, based mostly on the fact that the state of Kentucky does not have a law in place making online gambling illegal. Furthermore, the sites in question are based overseas.

Online Casino Advisory went so far as to launch a boycotting campaign on all taxable gambling products in Kentucky:

A judge in Franklin County Kentucky court saw things Beshear’s way, but the ruling was overturned by an Appeals court before making its way to the Kentucky Supreme Court.

John Pappas, executive director of the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), which has over 13,000 members in the Commonwealth of Kentucky and over a million members in the U.S. once told WebProNews that Governor Beshear’s attempt to block access to online sites in the state "is hypocritical and shortsighted."

Back in March, Attorney Clarke Walton, who owns and operates a site that is affiliated with the poker industry, talked about the case with WebProNews:

The suit is largely looked upon as a joke within the Poker community. Matthew Kredell with Poker news writes, "The lawsuit is ultimately pointless because the sites would continue to operate without their domain names. The only players who type in a domain name are the ones looking to initially download the software, and the search engines could easily be changed to recognize a new address. After the issue arose, Full Tilt Poker bought fulltilt.com as a precaution."

"By blocking online gambling sites in Kentucky, Governor Beshear is also blocking these sites for residents of other states and countries," Pappas said. "This clearly oversteps his bounds as Governor of Kentucky and likely violates several laws including the U.S. Constitution." 

In December, state lawyers said they would add names of specific (but publicly unnamed) U.S. citizens to the suit. The industry is optimistic that the KY Supreme Court will reject Beshear’s mission anyway, and that the next step in the process would be the U.S. Supreme Court, which is highly unlikely to hear the case.

Everybody may be finding out the next steps later this month. If the case doesn’t come up then, the next time it may surface would be in March, according to Kredell.

Do you think the state of Kentucky has a legitimate case? Share your thoughts in the comments.

Related Articles:

> Kentucky Governor Cracks Down On Online Gambling

> A Closer Look At Kentucky’s Online Gambling Plan

> Kentucky Judge Rules: Forfeit Gambling Domains

That argument isn’t likely to fly with Beshear, who demanded international gambling sites block access to Kentuckians because of potential children’s access, loss of tax revenue, competition with the horse industry, money-laundering, and lack of consumer protections.

Other arguments not likely to fly with Beshear but were made to the Kentucky Court of Appeals last Friday:

• The previous Circuit Court judge does not have the jurisdiction to allow the Kentucky government to seize international domains registered in countries where gambling is legal.
• Domain names are not gambling devices.
• Domain names can only be seized after criminal convictions; there have been none.
• Kentucky is prohibited by the commerce clause of the US Constitution from regulating interstate and international commerce.

The state has rebutted that attorneys for the defendants have no standing to challenge seizure of the domain names because they won’t name their clients. The ACLU argues that revealing their clients would be a violation of the Fifth Amendment since the state is coercing them into self-incrimination.

The state’s lawyer, apparently the best our cash-strapped state could afford, accused gambling sites of running a “massive offshore criminal conspiracy” and masquerading as legitimate business.

Someone is likely to tell him that if it’s not illegal in the countries their based, it’s legitimate business. And technically, gambling’s not illegal in Kentucky either, if you count horse racing and lottery.

One of these days logic will return to our politicians, locally and nationally, but it won’t be this day obviously.
 

This was the same guy that wanted but failed to get the General Assembly on board to allow casino gambling so the state wouldn’t lose millions upon millions of tax revenues as citizens drove across a bridge to Indiana. That made sense, more sense than predecessor Ernie Fletcher’s ridiculousness about how casinos turned the areas around them into third world countries as the light of the casinos prove just too powerful for the gambling moths. Fletcher’s arguments sounded similar to the National Retail Federation’s about the addictiveness of eBay. Thieves and whores and thievin’ whores abound while children starve to death.  

But Beshear’s argument for seizing the domains of 141 online gambling sites is unconscionable on a whole other level. In this case, Beshear extends that authority with a specious—at best—argument about protecting the Commonwealth. “[Online gambling]’s hurting our legalized gaming activity. It hurts fair and mutual betting. It hurts our lottery. It hurts charitable gaming that our churches and softball teams do to support themselves.”

Don’t get me started on Christian gambling. For every Bingo hall, there’s a Baptist on the corner opposing a new racetrack. But softball teams? Does he mean raffles? Next he’ll be the grand defender of March Madness office pools.

While defending his position by asserting online gambling is an affront not only to state-sanctioned gambling, but also to church-and-softball-team-sponsored gambling, he glazes over the more important issue: jurisdiction. Remember how New York decided it had the authority to collect sales tax on out-of-state sales? The situation in Kentucky is similar in overreaching authority.

Probably no one would have made much of a stink if Beshear had announced a plan to block illegal websites. Constitutionally or not, online gambling is illegal in the Untied States thanks to Bush’s DOJ and their grand imaginings of granted power. But Beshear wants to take the domains from companies based overseas. It’s not just an intestate commerce issue. It’s an international commerce issue.

Beshear is right to believe lots of these sites are shady—easily technologically fixed in favor of the site—but that’s why we have fraud laws on the books. Opposition to Beshear gathered in Frankfort on Tuesday for a hearing. The Governor likewise characterized the organization as shady because they wouldn’t reveal exactly whom they were representing.

That’s because the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association represents more than just a handful of international gaming sites. They represent pretty much anybody doing business on the Internet. On their website, they list the types of issues iMEGA takes on: freedom, privacy, security, choice, content rights, commerce & taxation, net neutrality, citizen journalism, ethics and best practices.

As for how Joe Brennan, Jr., chair of iMEGA responded to Beshear calling his organization shady, he didn’t mince any words in this YouTube video that’s been voted up on Digg and is now officially embarrassing our whole state across the Internet. “The only person I would suggest who has acted in a shady and unethical manner thus far is the governor and his council. . . . If I’m gonna be called shady and my trade association is gonna be called shady by the governor of Kentucky, that is like the pot trying to call the kettle black.”

Ordinarily, them’s fightin’ words. But I cain’t gather up the gumption to defend my governor on this one. 
 
 

This was the same guy that wanted but failed to get the General Assembly on board to allow casino gambling so the state wouldn’t lose millions upon millions of tax revenues as citizens drove across a bridge to Indiana. That made sense, more sense than predecessor Ernie Fletcher’s ridiculousness about how casinos turned the areas around them into third world countries as the light of the casinos prove just too powerful for the gambling moths. Fletcher’s arguments sounded similar to the National Retail Federation’s about the addictiveness of eBay. Thieves and whores and thievin’ whores abound while children starve to death.  

But Beshear’s argument for seizing the domains of 141 online gambling sites is unconscionable on a whole other level. In this case, Beshear extends that authority with a specious—at best—argument about protecting the Commonwealth. “[Online gambling]’s hurting our legalized gaming activity. It hurts fair and mutual betting. It hurts our lottery. It hurts charitable gaming that our churches and softball teams do to support themselves.”

Don’t get me started on Christian gambling. For every Bingo hall, there’s a Baptist on the corner opposing a new racetrack. But softball teams? Does he mean raffles? Next he’ll be the grand defender of March Madness office pools.

While defending his position by asserting online gambling is an affront not only to state-sanctioned gambling, but also to church-and-softball-team-sponsored gambling, he glazes over the more important issue: jurisdiction. Remember how New York decided it had the authority to collect sales tax on out-of-state sales? The situation in Kentucky is similar in overreaching authority.

Probably no one would have made much of a stink if Beshear had announced a plan to block illegal websites. Constitutionally or not, online gambling is illegal in the Untied States thanks to Bush’s DOJ and their grand imaginings of granted power. But Beshear wants to take the domains from companies based overseas. It’s not just an intestate commerce issue. It’s an international commerce issue.

Beshear is right to believe lots of these sites are shady—easily technologically fixed in favor of the site—but that’s why we have fraud laws on the books. Opposition to Beshear gathered in Frankfort on Tuesday for a hearing. The Governor likewise characterized the organization as shady because they wouldn’t reveal exactly whom they were representing.

That’s because the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association represents more than just a handful of international gaming sites. They represent pretty much anybody doing business on the Internet. On their website, they list the types of issues iMEGA takes on: freedom, privacy, security, choice, content rights, commerce & taxation, net neutrality, citizen journalism, ethics and best practices.

As for how Joe Brennan, Jr., chair of iMEGA responded to Beshear calling his organization shady, he didn’t mince any words in this YouTube video that’s been voted up on Digg and is now officially embarrassing our whole state across the Internet. “The only person I would suggest who has acted in a shady and unethical manner thus far is the governor and his council. . . . If I’m gonna be called shady and my trade association is gonna be called shady by the governor of Kentucky, that is like the pot trying to call the kettle black.”

Ordinarily, them’s fightin’ words. But I cain’t gather up the gumption to defend my governor on this one. 
 
 

This was the same guy that wanted but failed to get the General Assembly on board to allow casino gambling so the state wouldn’t lose millions upon millions of tax revenues as citizens drove across a bridge to Indiana. That made sense, more sense than predecessor Ernie Fletcher’s ridiculousness about how casinos turned the areas around them into third world countries as the light of the casinos prove just too powerful for the gambling moths. Fletcher’s arguments sounded similar to the National Retail Federation’s about the addictiveness of eBay. Thieves and whores and thievin’ whores abound while children starve to death.  

But Beshear’s argument for seizing the domains of 141 online gambling sites is unconscionable on a whole other level. In this case, Beshear extends that authority with a specious—at best—argument about protecting the Commonwealth. “[Online gambling]’s hurting our legalized gaming activity. It hurts fair and mutual betting. It hurts our lottery. It hurts charitable gaming that our churches and softball teams do to support themselves.”

Don’t get me started on Christian gambling. For every Bingo hall, there’s a Baptist on the corner opposing a new racetrack. But softball teams? Does he mean raffles? Next he’ll be the grand defender of March Madness office pools.

While defending his position by asserting online gambling is an affront not only to state-sanctioned gambling, but also to church-and-softball-team-sponsored gambling, he glazes over the more important issue: jurisdiction. Remember how New York decided it had the authority to collect sales tax on out-of-state sales? The situation in Kentucky is similar in overreaching authority.

Probably no one would have made much of a stink if Beshear had announced a plan to block illegal websites. Constitutionally or not, online gambling is illegal in the Untied States thanks to Bush’s DOJ and their grand imaginings of granted power. But Beshear wants to take the domains from companies based overseas. It’s not just an intestate commerce issue. It’s an international commerce issue.

Beshear is right to believe lots of these sites are shady—easily technologically fixed in favor of the site—but that’s why we have fraud laws on the books. Opposition to Beshear gathered in Frankfort on Tuesday for a hearing. The Governor likewise characterized the organization as shady because they wouldn’t reveal exactly whom they were representing.

That’s because the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association represents more than just a handful of international gaming sites. They represent pretty much anybody doing business on the Internet. On their website, they list the types of issues iMEGA takes on: freedom, privacy, security, choice, content rights, commerce & taxation, net neutrality, citizen journalism, ethics and best practices.

As for how Joe Brennan, Jr., chair of iMEGA responded to Beshear calling his organization shady, he didn’t mince any words in this YouTube video that’s been voted up on Digg and is now officially embarrassing our whole state across the Internet. “The only person I would suggest who has acted in a shady and unethical manner thus far is the governor and his council. . . . If I’m gonna be called shady and my trade association is gonna be called shady by the governor of Kentucky, that is like the pot trying to call the kettle black.”

Ordinarily, them’s fightin’ words. But I cain’t gather up the gumption to defend my governor on this one. 
 
 

This was the same guy that wanted but failed to get the General Assembly on board to allow casino gambling so the state wouldn’t lose millions upon millions of tax revenues as citizens drove across a bridge to Indiana. That made sense, more sense than predecessor Ernie Fletcher’s ridiculousness about how casinos turned the areas around them into third world countries as the light of the casinos prove just too powerful for the gambling moths. Fletcher’s arguments sounded similar to the National Retail Federation’s about the addictiveness of eBay. Thieves and whores and thievin’ whores abound while children starve to death.  

But Beshear’s argument for seizing the domains of 141 online gambling sites is unconscionable on a whole other level. In this case, Beshear extends that authority with a specious—at best—argument about protecting the Commonwealth. “[Online gambling]’s hurting our legalized gaming activity. It hurts fair and mutual betting. It hurts our lottery. It hurts charitable gaming that our churches and softball teams do to support themselves.”

Don’t get me started on Christian gambling. For every Bingo hall, there’s a Baptist on the corner opposing a new racetrack. But softball teams? Does he mean raffles? Next he’ll be the grand defender of March Madness office pools.

While defending his position by asserting online gambling is an affront not only to state-sanctioned gambling, but also to church-and-softball-team-sponsored gambling, he glazes over the more important issue: jurisdiction. Remember how New York decided it had the authority to collect sales tax on out-of-state sales? The situation in Kentucky is similar in overreaching authority.

Probably no one would have made much of a stink if Beshear had announced a plan to block illegal websites. Constitutionally or not, online gambling is illegal in the Untied States thanks to Bush’s DOJ and their grand imaginings of granted power. But Beshear wants to take the domains from companies based overseas. It’s not just an intestate commerce issue. It’s an international commerce issue.

Beshear is right to believe lots of these sites are shady—easily technologically fixed in favor of the site—but that’s why we have fraud laws on the books. Opposition to Beshear gathered in Frankfort on Tuesday for a hearing. The Governor likewise characterized the organization as shady because they wouldn’t reveal exactly whom they were representing.

That’s because the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association represents more than just a handful of international gaming sites. They represent pretty much anybody doing business on the Internet. On their website, they list the types of issues iMEGA takes on: freedom, privacy, security, choice, content rights, commerce & taxation, net neutrality, citizen journalism, ethics and best practices.

As for how Joe Brennan, Jr., chair of iMEGA responded to Beshear calling his organization shady, he didn’t mince any words in this YouTube video that’s been voted up on Digg and is now officially embarrassing our whole state across the Internet. “The only person I would suggest who has acted in a shady and unethical manner thus far is the governor and his council. . . . If I’m gonna be called shady and my trade association is gonna be called shady by the governor of Kentucky, that is like the pot trying to call the kettle black.”

Ordinarily, them’s fightin’ words. But I cain’t gather up the gumption to defend my governor on this one. 
 
 

Granted, online poker sites are illegal in the US; here in the Land of the Free we’re only allowed to gamble via state-approved venues. And granted, these gambling sites are suspect—just read last week one got in trouble for spying on players’ poker hands and rigging the games.

In short, I ain’t risking my money in these joints.

But Beshear is demanding jurisdiction over sites already policed by ICANN and operated in foreign countries? Really? That’s the first thing that doesn’t make any sense at all.

The other thing is his defense of it. Without giving any support or data whatsoever, he says these “illegal sites” deprive KY of “millions of dollars in revenue.” Um, what? The only gambling revenue the state gets is via state lotto taxes and taxes on earnings from horse races. Is the state thinking of imposing a backroom poker tax? How much of the money we weren’t getting anyway are we losing, Beshear?

He also says it undermines the horseracing industry, I’m guessing by betting on horse races outside the horse tracks, which is just more government hypocrisy. Once again, I’m granted the liberty to go to a state-approved place to gamble, so long as the government gets its cut. Let me put that another way: I’m allowed to exercise my freedom to do with my money as I choose, so long as I choose to do it in a certain way and the state benefits from it—otherwise its illegal and immoral.

I hate gambling. Just sayin’.

The worst part was when he brought the kids into it and said online gambling posed “a unique threat…particularly to our youth.” There doesn’t seem to be one shred of data to support that.

This strikes me as serious political posturing. Beshear’s efforts to get casinos approved has been stalled by the moralistic and/or illogical in the General Assembly—if he can appear tough on unregulated gambling maybe they’ll soften up on the regulated kind.

Beshear has filed a civil suit against the 141 domain names and is asking the court to force the sites to block access to Kentucky users or give up control of their domain names.

Governor Steve Beshear

"Unlicensed, unregulated, illegal Internet gambling poses a tremendous threat to the citizens of the Commonwealth because of its ease, availability and anonymity," Governor Steve Beshear said. 

"The owners and operators of these illegal sites prey on Kentucky citizens, including our youth, and deprive the Commonwealth of millions of dollars in revenue.  It’s an underworld wrought with scams and schemes."

Kentucky is the first state to bring action against Internet gambling operators that has resulted in the seizure of domain names. By seizing the domain names, Kentucky can require the illegal casino operators to block their domains from being accessed in the state.

Beshear said Kentucky loses millions of dollars a year to online gambling and unlicensed Internet gambling significantly undermines Kentucky’s signature horseracing industry, by creating unregulated and untaxed competition.

Secretary J. Michael Brown said that site owners, who register domain names, agree to terms that the domain name will not be used for illegal purposes. He said some online gambling sites currently block access to Kentucky users.

"Governor Beshear has once again demonstrated that he is willing to take bold and innovative steps to protect Kentuckians and Kentucky’s legitimate businesses," Secretary Brown said. 

"Illegal Internet gambling poses a unique threat to our Commonwealth.  For individuals – particularly our youth – it is tantamount to a virtual home invasion.  For some of our vital and most venerable legitimate enterprises, it undermines their exemplary regulatory compliance and siphons away their constituents."

Read the related followup article "A Closer Look At Kentucky’s Online Gambling Plan: Industry Angry".
 

Steve Beshear, Kentucky Democratic Governor
(Photo Credit: ChangeforKentucky.com)

WebProNews spoke with the Governor’s spokeswoman, Vicki Glass, about the details of Beshear’s reversal. "Gov. Beshear felt that access to political sites was something government employees could be trusted not to abuse. Those sites that Fletcher blocked, Gov. Beshear is unblocking."

That includes lifting gateway-level bans on political, religious, and sports blogs, as well as shopping websites. Ms. Glass said access to shopping sites like eBay was important for state employees who make purchasing decisions. Access to gambling, dating, pornography, and computer game sites will remain blocked however, including social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook.

The full list of blocked sites was not readily available because the person who handles that specifically was out for observation of the Good Friday holiday. Ms. Glass wasn’t able to define exactly how a MySpace personal profile was different from a blog, but it was clear that the Governor’s office differentiated social networking sites from political blogs and other topical sources. Access to MySpace and Facebook are blocked at the gateway level.

"For what are considered political blogs," she said, "the ban was lifted because they often discuss what’s going on in state government." Beshear felt government employees should have access to relevant information and discussions.

That doesn’t mean they should be allowed to comment on blogs while on the state’s dime, though. Ms. Glass confirmed that commentary during the workday was still prohibited. "The Finance Cabinet," which is in charge of the policy, felt, "that is not a good use of employee time. They can do that on their personal time."

Ms. Glass was also Gov. Beshear’s spokeswoman during his gubernatorial campaign in 2007. According to an AP report, Gov. Fletcher made physical contact with Ms. Glass during a press conference by trying to push her arm away while she attempted to tape record his remarks. She had no comment, though, about anything else regarding Fletcher, including the former technology commissioner Michael Inman’s sworn statement that Fletcher’s executive cabinet secretary, Robbie Rudolph, instituted the ban as political retaliation against critical bloggers.

At the center of that controversy is Mark Nickolas, who founded the BluegrasssReport blog. Inman said under oath that Fletcher’s administration targeted Nickolas specifically. Nickolas has since filed a federal lawsuit, which is still pending, claiming such actions by the state are an unconstitutional violation of free speech.

WebProNews also spoke with Mr. Nickolas, who says the "amateurish" government ban just helped get him more attention. "This closes a sad chapter on the legacy of the Fletcher Administration [which felt] the best way to deal with criticism was to silence it. They made what I did so much more prominent. It became a national story."

The attention also may have helped Nickolas take his political blogging to a national level as well. Though the BluegrassReport is still up and running, he was recruited by former CNET CEO Shelby Bonnie to head up PoliticalBase.com. Nickolas denies his lawsuit is about disallowing employers from monitoring and controlling what sites employees can access while on the job. Instead, it’s about not allowing government to silence political speech.

"Imagine it wasn’t a blog," he said, "but a written pamphlet handed out at the Capitol by hand. Imagine a Republican pamphleteer walks up the steps with me. Imagine they block one [pamphleteer] from entering and not the other. That’s when the government is applying a filter to political speech based on content."

Rush Limbaugh’s website, for example, was not blocked by Fletcher’s Administration. Nickolas likened blogs to talk radio shows, labeling both genres "opinion journalism."

Freedom of speech and the blogosphere were the focus of another nationally-covered snafu on the part of the state government. Recently, Rep. Tim Couch introduced a bill to the state legislature that would ban anonymous online commentary. Rep. Couch said it was just "to make a statement" about online bullying and that he didn’t expect the bill to succeed or to be enforceable if it did.

"The notion that government is threatened by speech is scary," said Nickolas, who called Rep. Couch a "blowhard." "We should be clamoring for more speech not less….Kentucky has enough problems to deal with that require real legislative leadership."