Sweepstakes company asks for stay of ban

Posted December 19, 2012

— The makers of software that drives sweepstakes gambling systems say they are appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court and have asked the state Supreme Court for a stay of an order banning the games.

In a unanimous decision last week, the state Supreme Court upheld a law that makes the games illegal. 

"A brief stay of this Court's judgment is appropriate while Plaintiffs seek further appellate review," wrote Richard Gottlieb, a lawyer for International Internet Technologies, one of the companies involved in the lawsuit.

In his filing, Gottlieb writes that the U.S. Supreme Court "typically rules on petitions for certiorari two to three weeks after a briefing closes."

The games in question are designed around a system of drawings. Typically, players buy phone or Internet time and in return get entries into the sweepstakes. Software makers say the games merely reveal the pre-determined results in an entertaining way, not unlike contests conducted by soda bottlers or fast food chains.

But the state Supreme Court ruled the system was a work-around of North Carolina's broader ban on gambling and that lawmakers had the right to ban the practice. 

State law enforcement officials said they had planned to begin enforcing the state law on Jan. 3, 2013. If a stay is granted, sweepstakes businesses could likely stay open until sometime in the spring, even if the U.S. Supreme Court does not decide to take up the case.


This blog post is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • ncrepublican1776 Dec 20, 2012

    I agree southerntalent..I dont want that kind of trash in my neighborhood either.

  • southerntalent Dec 20, 2012

    ever ride by one of those places and see it is the people who can barely afford kids or are on govt assistance wasting their money at those places.

  • AlbertEinstein Dec 20, 2012

    Obscure arguments of the irrational. Taxes, crime, drugs, religion, and on - just where do the childish comments stop and begin to reflect objectivity towards commerce, morality, and improvement of society?

  • fivetoolkid Dec 19, 2012

    disgusted- what misery do you speak of?
    Also- thats an ignorant statement, bc drugs are currently illegal and the fate of sweepstakes is yet to be determined, and as of now are protected by an injunction.

  • Rebelyell55 Dec 19, 2012

    "Was it not BEV PURDUE that signed this bill into law??"

    Yes and a GOP controlled Supreme Court. Next.

    December 19, 2012 4:13 p.m___________________________________
    All of that is true, and Bev. also started looking at this as source of additional revnue for the state. Many counties saw a drop in tax when they shut em down a few years ago. If they're not going to regulate them, then yes shut em down. Right now there is too much room for abuse. The LEO don't like em due to complaint where someone spouse lost the rent money or whole pay check. They're also starting to be a source for arm robbery.

  • disgusted2010 Dec 19, 2012

    This would be like drug dealers getting together and asking the state to stop drug arrests. It is amazing how much misery these people have caused over the years all in the name of money.

  • fivetoolkid Dec 19, 2012

    As far as taxing the locations- the high taxes in cities like Raleigh and Wilmington is unfair. A $1000 tax per terminal is so out of control- It s cheaper to open s strip club. Others will agree and would know how much some of these gvt's charge, but anything over $25 a terminal is outrageous.

  • fivetoolkid Dec 19, 2012

    The lottery/harrahs has nothing to do with whether sweepstakes should be legal or not. The gvt can do what they want to do,they lied about the lottery to get it passed-look it up.They have misled and lied about HArrahs too. Anyone remember that one of the rules to get the lotto was there would not be any billboards on highway? How long did that last? The gvt does what they want to do. Sweepstakes does not meet the requirements of gambling. You get free entry,you get a product with a purchase, and odds are from a finite pool of entries. Its not gambling- but thats not the fight anymore. The gvt just banned them. Just like they banned synthetic pot- they didnt say it was a drug- they just banned it making it illegal to have. The gvt has the power to do whatever it wants to do. So the arguing over lotto and harrahs is dumb- has nothing to do with sweepstakes. Like saying you should be able to sell moonshine in a pool hall bc liquor is legal everywhere else. Its totally different.

  • Brian Jenkins Dec 19, 2012

    "Was it not BEV PURDUE that signed this bill into law??"

    Yes and a GOP controlled Supreme Court. Next.

  • dcatz Dec 19, 2012

    "Was it not BEV PURDUE that signed this bill into law??"

    Southern Democrats have ALWAYS been more socially conservative. The democrats started out as the party of social conservatism.