Key Takeaways
- Lawrence DiCristina, who was prosecuted for running an illegal poker game has petitioned the US Supreme Court to rule on the case.
- Two issues are presented as worthy of the court’s attention: the predominance of state law and the interpretation of “including but not limited to” legal clauses.
- In the course of studying the case the court may also rule as to whether poker is legally considered to be a game of skill.
- The Supreme Court is not obliged to rule on the case and will decide based on the significance of the issues raised.
Poker requires complex decisions based on psychology, math, observation, and strategy; many people reliably earn a living playing poker, which cannot be done playing a game with random results.
Bicycle shop owner Lawrence DiCristina, prosecuted for running an illegal poker game, has petitioned the US Supreme Court to rule on the case.
Mr DiCristina was charged with running two table No Limit Hold’em game where he charged 5% of each pot and in return “provided card dealers, food, and drinks.” The games were held regularly at his bicycle shop in New York.
