Editorial: Inherent unfairness on advertising ban

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday on whether it is constitutional for the federal government to ban television and radio advertising by casinos, yet permit the same advertising by Indian tribes and state-run lotteries. The Clinton administration contended that the existing ban helps protect compulsive gamblers who otherwise might be lured by the advertising. But Justice Stephen Breyer noted the inconsistency of the law's application when he asked the Justice Department's lawyer, "Why doesn't Indian casino advertising have the same effect as private casino gambling with respect to the compulsive gambler?"

Hopefully the high court will follow Breyer's logic and strike down this discriminatory ban. No one has yet advanced a persuasive argument that Indian gaming somehow is benign while gambling on private lands is addictive.

archive