Judiciary committee advances sweepstakes bill after tabling Rutherford amendment

The House Judiciary Committee on the House Judiciary Committee advanced Senate Bill 3, known in committee as the sweepstakes bill, after tabling an amendment that would have made magistrate-court rulings about disputed gaming devices binding on law enforcement.

Representative Bannister, reporting for the constitutional law subcommittee, said the measure is intended to close an exception being used to justify possession of video-poker-style machines. "they needed this bill to clarify that there is no exception for electronic gambling machines," he said. Bannister told members the bill clarifies the statute and targets devices being marketed or modified to exploit sweepstakes or alcohol-license exceptions.

Representative Rutherford offered an amendment to make magistrate determinations binding on law enforcement (subject to appeal), arguing the change would prevent what he called "judge shopping" and repeated seizures of the same machines. He described local enforcement actions he said ignored magistrates and continued seizures until a favorable ruling was found. "They keep, they seize it as many times as they want," Rutherford said during debate.

Other members raised drafting concerns and asked whether the bill already addressed the problem; Representative Funderbar questioned how the amendment would matter if the bill were to make the machines illegal. The committee ultimately voted to table Rutherford's amendment on a division vote (show of hands), 14 to 6. The committee then gave S.3 a favorable report by voice vote.