EagleTribune.com, North Andover, MA

Boston and Beyond

May 6, 2014

High court considers casino repeal question

BOSTON — The debate over whether voters should be allowed to decide the fate of Las Vegas-style casino gambling in Massachusetts had its day before the state’s highest court Monday.

The Supreme Judicial Court heard arguments in an appeal over a proposed November ballot question that would effectively repeal the 2011 law that opened the door for at least three regional casinos and one slot parlor in Massachusetts. The court is expected to rule on the case sometime before July.

The anti-casino group “Repeal the Casino Deal” gathered the required 68,911 signatures from voters to place the question on the ballot. But the state Attorney General’s office ruled in September that the proposal violated the state constitution and declined to certify it.

In court Monday, Assistant Attorney General Peter Sacks argued that the ballot question is not permissible because it would result in casino developers losing property rights without being compensated. He said gambling companies have an “implied contractual right” to see the casino licensing process completed given the significant financial investment they have made in developing and promoting their projects.

Sacks said the situation is akin to when a company applies for a government contract through the public bidding process. Applicants in that instance, he said, are entitled to recovering certain costs if the public body does not complete the process.

But Thomas Bean, a lawyer representing “Repeal the Casino Deal,” countered that compensation isn’t required since there are no existing property or contract rights. Instead, he argued that the state has the right to revisit and revise laws impacting “public morals and welfare” at any time through its so-called “police powers.”

Justices on the seven-member panel pushed back on that assertion.

“The police powers don’t trump the state constitution,” said Justice Robert Cordy. “You can’t say, ‘We have police powers therefore we can take contract rights away without compensation.’”

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Latest News
Boston and Beyond

New England News
Photos of the Week