-Caveat Lector- Supreme Court Ponders Gambling Ads By RICHARD CARELLI .c The Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) -- Supreme Court justices voiced free-speech concerns Tuesday over a ban on television and radio advertisements promoting privately owned casinos, the federal government's effort to help compulsive gamblers. Repeatedly during a 60-minute argument session, queries and comments from the bench questioned how the ban can protect such people when 240 casinos owned by Indian tribes in 31 states, 38 state-run lotteries and other gambling operations are free to advertise at will. Justice Department lawyer Barbara Underwood emphasized the ``devastating social costs'' caused by an estimated 3 million compulsive gamblers, and said Congress was entitled to address part of the problem by reining in commercial speech. Some justices appeared unconvinced. ``Why doesn't Indian casino gambling have the same effect as private casino gambling with respect to the compulsive gambler?'' Justice Stephen G. Breyer asked Underwood. And Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggested the ban might deter only the casual gambler. ``The true drunk is going to find the bottle,'' she said, equating tribe-owned casinos with that bottle. ``Can the government use speech as an element of political largesse?'' Justice Anthony M. Kennedy asked in a tone that hinted he thinks it cannot. A long-standing federal law bans broadcast advertising for ``any lottery, gift enterprise or similar scheme offering prizes dependent in whole or in part upon lot or chance.'' But over the past 20 years, Congress has amended that law to allow ads for casinos on Indian reservations, state-run lotteries or any gambling sponsored by nonprofit promoters for charitable purposes. Since 1988, the law primarily has targeted privately owned casinos. It is being enforced only in some parts of the country because federal appeals courts have split over its constitutionality. The Supreme Court for two decades has demanded that any government limits on truthful and non-deceptive commercial speech be shown to directly advance some asserted government interest and be no more extensive than necessary. If they do not, the court has ruled, they violate the First Amendment's free-speech protections. Justices David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens and Sandra Day O'Connor also seemed skeptical that the casino ad ban meets that test. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Antonin Scalia appeared to be most sympathetic to the government's defense of the ban. Justice Clarence Thomas said nothing. But when the court last year prevented states from banning advertising that refers to liquor prices -- an effort to promote sobriety -- Thomas wrote separately to support giving commercial speech full-fledged constitutional protection. Bruce Ennis, a Washington lawyer representing the New Orleans-area broadcasters who challenged the advertising ban, called the case ``an appropriate vehicle'' for doing just that. But he said the court need not go that far to overturn the law. ``The federal scheme is so riddled with exceptions that it cannot advance the government's asserted interest,'' he contended. A key to the casino ad case may be whether the court believes a law with so many exceptions can protect compulsive gamblers. A decision is expect by late June. DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
