Skip to main content

State power over sports betting

Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn.

Updated Oct 18, 2026

In brief

The Supreme Court overturned the ruling that had upheld PASPA against New Jersey’s challenge.

Where it stands
Decided

Decided 7-2 · May 14, 2018 · Opinion by Justice Breyer

What it’s about
New Jersey challenged PASPA, a federal law that barred states from changing or repealing their bans on sports betting. The Supreme Court overturned the Third Circuit’s judgment upholding PASPA.
Who it affects
New Jersey won its appeal of a ruling that upheld federal restrictions on changes to state sports-betting laws.

Summary: written with AI from the case record.

Illustration for Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn.
Conceptual illustration · AI-generated

What it's about

The case asked whether Congress can force states to keep their own bans on private conduct in place.

Question presented

Does a federal statute that prohibits modification or repeal of state-law prohibitions on private conduct impermissibly commandeer the regulatory power of States in contravention of New York v. United States , 505 U.S. 144 (1992)?

What the Court decided

Holding

Judgment REVERSED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Thomas, Kagan, and Gorsuch, JJ., joined, and in which Breyer, J., joined as to all but Part VI-B. Thomas, J., filed a concurring opinion. Breyer, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. Ginsburg, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Sotomayor, J., joined, and in which Breyer, J., joined in part. VIDED.

Result
Reversed

The vote

  • Joined the judgment
  • Dissented
  • Wrote an opinion
Majority · 7joined the Court's opinion
  1. Breyerwrote the opinion
  2. Kagan
  3. Thomasalso wrote separately
  4. Kennedy
  5. Roberts
  6. Gorsuch
  7. Alitoalso wrote separately
Dissenting · 2disagreed with the result
  1. Ginsburgwrote the dissent
  2. Sotomayor
7 justices joined the judgment, 2 dissented.

What's next

The Supreme Court has completed its review of this case.

Documents

3

Docket activity

8
  • New analysis added

    Oct 18, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Case Briefing

    Oct 18, 2026 · Generated

  • AI analysis generated: Decision Record

    Oct 18, 2026 · Generated

  • Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata

    Oct 18, 2026 · Court records

  • Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata

    Oct 18, 2026 · Court records

Show 3 more
  • Opinion added: Opinion

    May 14, 2018 · Court records

  • Opinion added: opinion

    May 14, 2018 · Court records

  • Brief added: Questions Presented

    Court records

Sources

Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.

Checked Oct 18, 2026Methodology

Court records and filings

Reporting and analysis