Legalize It (2 Viewers)

[Taghkanic]

We all have our differences, but I think everyone on this board could probably agree on one thing:

Home poker games should be legal. Everywhere.

So I wanted to start a thread to discuss how this goal might be achieved. It might take decades to get to the finish line. But I think we all have a strong incentive to work toward making it happen.

Given the distribution of members, the focus is likely to be on the United States. But it would be interesting to also discuss how poker is regulated internationally, to mine for ideas, and also to promote the idea around the world.

I’ll leave the intro at that. But I wanted to see if we could get the ball rolling on an in-earnest discussion of how to make our home games legal.

 

[Taghkanic]

... Now, I assume there may be at least two contrarian takes on this notion:

(1) “It’ll never happen.”

(2) “To be realistic, the actual risk of my unraked home game among friends ever getting busted is less than the chance of me getting hit by lightning. So why should I care?”

The answer to (1) is easy: Nothing is possible until someone does it. See: The Emancipation Proclamation. Women’s suffrage. Gay marriage. etc.

The answer to (2) is maybe less easy. Sure, your personal exposure may be slight. But what a better overall poker ecosystem we would enjoy if all home games were legal. I think a lot of people would expand their hosting ambitions if this occurred.

So I hope we can dispense with those arguments...

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Great. For clarity, are we defining home poker games as games without rake, or do raked games still count as home games? Not arguing either way, just defining terms early on.

 

[cpac54]

Are unraked home games not legal in the U.S.?? (serious question).

Here in Switzerland, poker clubs outside of the casino environment operate in a very grey area - you can get a license for tournaments (for money) but cash games are, strictly speaking, illegal.

Home games are regulated differently though - as long as there's no public advertising of the game/the game is played amongst friends or people who have an acquaintance outside the poker game, there's no rake (i.e. all cash in gets paid out), and the money in play is "small/reasonable" (this amount is not defined), then it's perfectly okay to host poker at home.

 

[FordPickup92]

Are unraked home games not legal in the U.S.?? (serious question).

Here in Switzerland, poker clubs outside of the casino environment operate in a very grey area - you can get a license for tournaments (for money) but cash games are, strictly speaking, illegal.

Home games are regulated differently though - as long as there's no public advertising of the game/the game is played amongst friends or people who have an acquaintance outside the poker game, there's no rake (i.e. all cash in gets paid out), and the money in play is "small/reasonable" (this amount is not defined), then it's perfectly okay to host poker at home.

In some states, no

 

[iLogik]

I believe non-raked games are legal in California, I play with code officials and officers and never had issues but never read a law prohibiting it

 

[Taghkanic]

In the U.S., my sense is that State and Federal laws limiting or banning (non-casino) poker games has several origins and motivations:

(A) Outdated senses of morality going back many decades or even to previous centuries, promoted by religious and other groups;

(B) The influence of larger economic forces such as casino owners on politicians;

(C) Fear of lawlessness arising from unsupervised or less-regulated “gambling” activity, such as robbery and related violence.

(D) The idea that poker is a “game of chance” much like roulette, slot machines, or other forms of pure gambling—as opposed to a game where players can use skill to win, lose, or at least manage variance.

I think we can dispense with (A). Given the widespread popularity and acceptance of lottery ticket sales at every convenience store (and many bars, etc.) in the country, the huge popularity of slots and table games, etc. it’s pretty plain that there are not many people left who seriously think you’re burning in Hell if you play poker.

(B) is a more serious obstacle, since billionaires have a lot of clout among lawmakers.

(C) is a concern which I think must be addressed, but is hardly unique to home poker games. We all have have a bigger chance of getting into a fight at a local bar, or getting knifed/shot on the street, than at a private poker game. (Heck, there was a big controversy in the county where I live when a guy got almost beaten to death at the home of a county sheriff, with several law enforcement officers present at the barbecue where it happened, and some of them alleged to have participated.)

(D) has been addressed in some court cases, with varying results. But even when it has been acknowledged that poker is a game involving skill more akin to golf than roulette, this does not seem to have change the laws governing git.

I would think any push to legalize home games would include some kind of legal framework meant to minimize the chance of theft or violence.

 

[Taghkanic]

Are unraked home games not legal in the U.S.?? (serious question).

Here in Switzerland, poker clubs outside of the casino environment operate in a very grey area - you can get a license for tournaments (for money) but cash games are, strictly speaking, illegal.

Home games are regulated differently though - as long as there's no public advertising of the game/the game is played amongst friends or people who have an acquaintance outside the poker game, there's no rake (i.e. all cash in gets paid out), and the money in play is "small/reasonable" (this amount is not defined), then it's perfectly okay to host poker at home.

Part of the problem is the definition of “rake.” (There are lots of existing discussions on this site on that subtopic.)

Rake seems to be the red line that most U.S. state laws don’t want to you cross. But what is rake?

The regs which I’ve researched seem to take a hard line on the host receiving any reimbursement for hospitality costs — as distinct from raking pots to turn a profit on hosting.

Meanwhile, many of us encounter the situation over time of the cost of providing amenities for our home games creeping up and up. I used to just have a few sodas and chips on hand; now I spend about $150 per game on dinner, beer, wine, snacks, etc. I also now have a dealer, which makes our game run so much more smoothly and efficiently. He needs some compensation—either a flat fee, or tips. If players contribute to paying for his work, most states seem to deem that a rake.

 

[Taghkanic]

I play with code officials and officers and never had issues but never read a law prohibiting it

I’ve played with judges, local cops, State troopers, politicians, even a District Attorney. Their presence in these private/home games makes me feel less likely to get raided or robbed. But their presence doesn’t make those games more or less legal.

 

[Taghkanic]

Great. For clarity, are we defining home poker games as games without rake, or do raked games still count as home games? Not arguing either way, just defining terms early on.

See my comment above...

My own hope would be for “rake” to be more clearly and narrowly defined in local/State/Federal laws to refer to those monies taken off the table or at the door for the purpose of profiting from hosting, as distinct from defraying costs of amenities which the players want and choose to help pay for (e.g., hot dogs cooked on rollers).

 

[Taghkanic]

I’d also like there to be clearer and more defined rules about establishing small poker clubs, based on membership, if a host wishes to expand beyond an ordinary home game among friends—more like fishing or hunting or tennis clubs. These would require more regulation, but ought to be possible.

In New York State, I’ve found some examples of people formally incorporating such clubs with the explicit and public goal of hosting poker games. But their legality strikes me as highly dubious and largely dependent on the operators having “pull” with local law enforcement who overlook their existence:

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/legal-cardroom-in-new-york.114154/

 

[Rakrul]

In Norway, we started a national poker association who then worked towards the politicians.
Every year we had the national poker championship out side of Norway and every year it was the biggest tournament in Europe with over 1000 participants. They also showed statistics of Norwegians playing online poker and live poker. Then they argued that x amount of people (which again is a lot. The Main Event buy in was €800 so not too trivial either) and said to the politicians "Here you have x amount of law abiding citizens who plays poker as a hobby and a small amount even plays professionally. They love the social aspect of it and it's a mind sport that requires skills; x, y, z." Then they invited some politicians to the national championship so they could meet the players drinking beers, playing poker and having tons of fun and then told the politicians "Your anti-home game poker law is making all these people criminals...".

Now home poker tournaments are allowed up to 20 people with a max loss limit of $100 per night per person. (Cash still not allowed, they couldn't give us everything of the bat. It started with 10 people so we have to fight for every inch.) There's also an official national poker championship in Norway with different side tournaments where the max loss limit is $200. It also has over 1000 participants every year, and parts of the income is donated to a selected charitable organization.
Now we have two national championships - one in Norway and one abroad. The one abroad doesn't have any loss limits so plenty more tournaments and tons of cash games as well.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Understand your desire…but I’d just let sleeping dogs lie. It may bring more awareness to the subject and increase enforcement. Opposition would be heavily invested to battle you (casinos).

I would be more interested in legalizing online poker for my home state.

And I would be somewhat interested in legalizing poker clubs. The risk of awareness may be worth it if you could turn it into a profitable business.

I always thing what else could a social club offer in addition to poker to increase attendance and legitimize it. Maybe a pickle ball court? Billiards? Foosball?

Buying out an existing pool hall would be a clever idea. Keep the existing customer base + add social club + add a few poker tables.

 

[SwissChip]

Are unraked home games not legal in the U.S.?? (serious question).

Here in Switzerland, poker clubs outside of the casino environment operate in a very grey area - you can get a license for tournaments (for money) but cash games are, strictly speaking, illegal.

Home games are regulated differently though - as long as there's no public advertising of the game/the game is played amongst friends or people who have an acquaintance outside the poker game, there's no rake (i.e. all cash in gets paid out), and the money in play is "small/reasonable" (this amount is not defined), then it's perfectly okay to host poker at home.

For a local poker room, it’s 300 max buy in, and in tournament structure.
But i heard they try ‚time poker‘. Time limited cash game with 2 or 3 blind levels.

 

[JustinInMN]

It's probably very difficult to have this discussion without invariably having to move this to the politics forum, but I will be curious where it goes.

Understand your desire…but I’d just let sleeping dogs lie. It may bring more awareness to the subject and increase enforcement. Opposition would be heavily invested to battle you (casinos).

It's probably a convenient privilege to agree with this take given I am in a jurisdiction friendly enough to operate how I want. But I do think too much noise in the safer places may be counter productive.

I really think the answer is to target the jurisdictions that are actually raiding home games.

But that discussion will inevitably devolve into the politics forum.

 

[allforcharity]

Move to Canada.

 

[ES_Threeper]

I think you would have to petition your state government to pass a law to legalize.
I am a current resident of Maryland. Here is a copy of the Maryland law as reference:
https://casetext.com/statute/code-o...tle-1c-gaming-laws/section-9-1c-01-home-games

I not saying this is the best law, but it is a start. I would research the home game laws of all states that have one and then submit a request to your local representative. You should include your research about other states.

 

[Broski]

Here in MS and "game" outside of a casino is illegal. Rake or not. Private club or home. No go

 

[Taghkanic]

Here are some details about the Staten Island case referenced above. Apparently the poker club met in the back room of a warehouse where the game runner also sold electric bicycles. There were two tables, and games twice per week. He was apparently prosecuted under a law meant to prevent organized crime from operating gambling dens:

1. The game runner was initially convicted.
2. A New York judge overturned the conviction due to poker being a game of skill, based on testimony on statistics.
3. A Federal court reinstated the conviction, but did not address the skill/luck question. They said he was not convicted because they were gambling, but because he was running a gambling business... A rather fine distinction, but an important one.
4. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the case.

This article provides a pretty comprehensive run-down of the legal particulars:

https://www.ksl.com/article/26318471/ny-appeals-court-reinstates-poker-conviction

Excerpt:

The appeals court... said in a unanimous ruling written by Judge Chester J. Straub that it was not necessary to consider whether poker was mostly a game of skill or chance to decide the case. It said all that mattered was that the games violated New York state law, involved five or more people who conducted or managed the business, that it existed for more than a month and had a gross revenue of $2,000 in any single day.​

​

"Thus, the question of whether skill or chance predominates in poker is inapposite to this appeal," the court said. ​

​

It also noted that legislators when the law was passed had been careful to create requirements that "would exclude the typical friendly game of poker."​

I’ll have to find the actual ruling to see how (or if) they defined a “typical friendly game of poker.” (This game seems to have been more of an organized ring.) I also am not clear how “gross revenue” was defined. Did that mean the total rake, or total amount of money in play?

 

[Taghkanic]

Here is the actual Federal decision reinstating the conviction:

https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/12-3720/12-3720-2013-08-06.pdf

 

[upNdown]

Meanwhile, many of us encounter the situation over time of the cost of providing amenities for our home games creeping up and up. I used to just have a few sodas and chips on hand; now I spend about $150 per game on dinner, beer, wine, snacks, etc. I also now have a dealer, which makes our game run so much more smoothly and efficiently. He needs some compensation—either a flat fee, or tips. If players contribute to paying for his work, most states seem to deem that a rake.

Yeah but none of that is necessary for a card game. I think you’re straying from the real issue when you get into all of that.

Just my opinion, but if you want to argue seriously about legalizing home card games, you need to focus on games where every dollar that goes into the game goes directly back to the players in cash at the end of the night. When you start trying to collect for expenses, you’re on a slippery slope.

 

[divinerites]

and the money in play is "small/reasonable" (this amount is not defined)

I can assure everyone that the "Swiss small amount" is not what you think. Whatever you think. Lol

You can see people paying with 1.000 chf bank note very often.

In France when you want to pay with 50€ bank note they call the cops. If it is a 100€ bank note they are allowed to directly shoot you ...

But Swiss are clever by authorizing anyone to organize tournaments if you request the right authorisation (quite easy to get).

This create the base food chain for the casinos.

 

[BGinGA]

In the U.S., my sense is that State and Federal laws limiting or banning (non-casino) poker games has several origins and motivations:

(A) Outdated senses of morality going back many decades or even to previous centuries, promoted by religious and other groups;

I think we can dispense with (A). Given the widespread popularity and acceptance of lottery ticket sales at every convenience store (and many bars, etc.) in the country, the huge popularity of slots and table games, etc. it’s pretty plain that there are not many people left who seriously think you’re burning in Hell if you play poker.

You clearly do not live in a religious state or in the Deep South. Those like-minded folks are most certainly alive and plentiful still today. And many have significant resources and/or political clout and the willingness to use either.

 

[Taghkanic]

You clearly do not live in a religious state or in the Deep South. Those like-minded folks are most certainly alive and plentiful still today. And many have significant resources and/or political clout and the willingness to use either.

I indeed do not.

However, I know many southerners (roomed with a South Carolinian for seven+ years) and thankfully have never met any opposed to gambling.

In this context, I’d note that poker originated (by most accounts) in Louisiana, where my nephew currently goes to school.

 

[JustinInMN]

In this context, I’d note that poker originated (by most accounts) in Louisiana.

Yes, and I think it's also fair to say the elements @BGinGA is talking about opposed it then as well.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Yeah but none of that is necessary for a card game. I think you’re straying from the real issue when you get into all of that.

Just my opinion, but if you want to argue seriously about legalizing home card games, you need to focus on games where every dollar that goes into the game goes directly back to the players in cash at the end of the night. When you start trying to collect for expenses, you’re on a slippery slope.

Totally understand about expenses creeping up.

I provide dinners for my players but most eat before they arrive so that’s an expense you can cut.

And you know what? I’d rather drop $100-$150 hosting at my place w friends then going out pretty much anywhere.

 

[Taghkanic]

Yes, and I think it's also fair to say the elements @BGinGA is talking about opposed it then as well.

Unsuccessfully! In any event, that was a good 200 years ago.

P.S. Gambling is only completely illegal in two states that I know of: Utah and Hawaii. Not exactly the Deep South.

 

[Taghkanic]

Just my opinion, but if you want to argue seriously about legalizing home card games, you need to focus on games where every dollar that goes into the game goes directly back to the players in cash at the end of the night. When you start trying to collect for expenses, you’re on a slippery slope.

I think this is far too purist a position.

Many legal businesses would not exist if they were subject to such strict standards and limitations.

We don’t say (for example) say that convenience stores can only sell cigarettes if they do not allow minors in the shop.

… Even though cigarettes are extremely harmful to everyone’s health, and society has a clear motivation to deter kids from getting hooked in their teens.

We also don’t say that prescription drugs can only be sold if the pharmacy takes no profit. Or that beer can’t be sold at baseball games.

Generally many attitudes around poker seem rather outdated and weirdly exceptional, even among some hosts and players.

Times change and society evolves.

When I was growing up, my state didn’t allow liquor sales on Sunday (the so-called “blue laws”). These have steadily eroded over time.

Likewise in my (liberal) state, it was until very recently illegal for restaurants to allow people to get alcoholic drinks as part of a takeout order. The pandemic changed that, and now the state has made the change permanent.

And don’t get me started on sports betting. Its widespread legalization is (in my view) far more problematic for society than anything that happens at 99.99% of non-casino home games, raked or not. And people can do it absolutely anywhere on their phones. I know many people who have happily played poker for many years ago without going broke, but suddenly have money troubles because of sports betting apps…

So I think it is entirely reasonable to permit games to accept reimbursements for amenities, especially if they are voluntary. This is tame stuff compared to what society allows in other arenas… If a game (say) asks players to kick in $10 toward pizzas, but a player doesn’t want to eat any, what exactly was the harm in the ask?

 

[upNdown]

I think this is far too purist a position.

Many legal businesses would not exist if they were subject to such strict standards and limitations.

We don’t say (for example) say that convenience stores can only sell cigarettes if they do not allow minors in the shop.

… Even though cigarettes are extremely harmful to everyone’s health, and society has a clear motivation to deter kids from getting hooked in their teens.

We also don’t say that prescription drugs can only be sold if the pharmacy takes no profit. Or that beer can’t be sold at baseball games.

Generally many attitudes around poker seem rather outdated and weirdly exceptional, even among some hosts and players.

Times change and society evolves.

When I was growing up, my state didn’t allow liquor sales on Sunday (the so-called “blue laws”). These have steadily eroded over time.

Likewise in my (liberal) state, it was until very recently illegal for restaurants to allow people to get alcoholic drinks as part of a takeout order. The pandemic changed that, and now the state has made the change permanent.

I think it is very reasonable to permit games to accept reimbursements for amenities especially if they are voluntary. If a game (say) asks players to kick in $10 toward pizzas, but a player doesn’t want to eat any, what exactly is the harm in the ask?

I’m not sure what you’re trying to do here - whether it’s just a discussion or actually the beginnings of some grassroots campaigns. And while there’s nothing wrong with a voluntary contribution for pizza, that’s a different issue than charging players for a dealer.
I guess all I’m saying is that if you’re pushing to legalize a situation where people pay a door charge or a rake to pay for expenses, that’s much more like the quasi-legal Texas poker clubs than a kitchen table home game. I think it’s two different issues.

For what it’s worth, I wish they had Texas style poker clubs in my state. Or charity based poker clubs like they have in a neighboring state. So maybe you need multi-level campaigns to achieve different goals.
But my point is that once you talk about mandatory payments for expenses, I think you’re talking about a second, and different issue.

 

[doublebooyah85]

I’m not sure what you’re trying to do here - whether it’s just a discussion or actually the beginnings of some grassroots campaigns. And while there’s nothing wrong with a voluntary contribution for pizza, that’s a different issue than charging players for a dealer.
I guess all I’m saying is that if you’re pushing to legalize a situation where people pay a door charge or a rake to pay for expenses, that’s much more like the quasi-legal Texas poker clubs than a kitchen table home game. I think it’s two different issues.

For what it’s worth, I wish they had Texas style poker clubs in my state. Or charity based poker clubs like they have in a neighboring state. So maybe you need multi-level campaigns to achieve different goals.
But my point is that once you talk about mandatory payments for expenses, I think you’re talking about a second, and different issue.

Agreed r we talking home game or social club.