Wilson Building Bulletin: Sports betting collides with an 18th-century British monarch

You wouldn’t expect a British monarch who died 311 years to factor into the proposed D.C. budget for 2026, yet she does – and in ways that could be consequential to the city’s sports betting industry. 

A brief provision buried in a 300-page budget bill submitted last week by Mayor Muriel Bowser seeks to amend an existing city law known as the Statute of Anne – as in, Queen Anne of Great Britain. The law, which dates back to 1710, makes it illegal to lose any more than $25 in a game of chance. (Yes, this applies to your weekly game of poker with friends. You're welcome.) The statute pre-dates U.S. independence but variations remain in effect in one form or another in almost three-dozen states, allowing losers of bets above a certain threshold to sue to get their money back – or for a third party to sue on their behalf. (In Virginia, you can only lose $5 before being empowered to sue!) The idea is simple: To discourage gambling, make it illegal for losers to incur any significant debts.

There’s plenty of quirky old D.C. laws on the books that are rarely enforced – and the Statute of Anne is no exception. Until recently, that is. In February, an anonymous limited liability corporation based in Delaware filed a lawsuit targeting the five biggest sports-betting operators in D.C. for allegedly violating the statute. (That’s Caesars, FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM, and Fanatics.) 

The LLC – known only as D.C. Gambling Recovery – has demanded damages worth three times the amount of losses that D.C.-based sports bettors incurred above the $25 threshold. Suffice to say that it’s a lot of money that’s potentially at play. For context, for the 2024 fiscal year there were 5.8 million wagers worth $184 million placed with the five biggest operators in D.C., and $160 million in payouts to the winners. 

The big sports betting operators have already filed their own responses seeking to quash the lawsuit, and asking to make their case directly to a federal judge in hopes of landing a quick dismissal. They say the statute is “archaic” and “outmoded,” and argue that any attempt to recover damages from bets placed on sports in D.C. under a centuries-old law linked to the British monarchy is “absurd as a matter of common sense.” But they also quietly fired up their local lobbying operations to clear any legal confusion moving forward, finding a willing partner in Bowser, who has her own policies to look out for: She’s also pushing to legalize commercial poker, blackjack, and bingo – all of which would be subject to the Statute of Anne. (Bowser's proposed amendment wouldn't repeal the Statute of Anne, but rather clarify that it doesn't apply to sports betting or any other legalized games of chance.)

As for the plaintiff itself, well, they only add to the mystery of this unusual lawsuit. We reached out to D.C. Gambling Recovery LLC’s lawyers, to no avail, and a visit to the LLC’s published address yielded only a mailbox at a downtown UPS store. The lawsuit itself says the point is to “allay some of [the] public health harms” associated with gambling, but one source at the National Council on Problem Gambling said they have nothing to do with it. D.C. itself is expected to get involved in the legal fight soon; Attorney General Brian Schwalb has been granted the right to weigh in on the lawsuit. In a fun twist, the Statute of Anne mandates that half the proceeds from a victorious lawsuit go back to the city itself.

Lawyers say this suit has an uphill battle in front of it, but I’m not placing a bet either way. Well, at least not a bet worth more than $25, for Queen Anne’s sake.

Tipped wage, paused

As we reported last month, Mayor Muriel Bowser is pushing to repeal Initiative 82, the voter-approved measure that slowly phases out the city’s tipped minimum wage. Most D.C. lawmakers we spoke to at the time, though, seemed less than enthused with revisiting the bruising battle over how most bar and restaurant workers get paid. But could that be changing?

On Tuesday the council approved an emergency bill that delays a planned summer increase in the tipped wage from $10 to $12, pushing it back instead to October. Proponents of the bill argued that a delay is necessary so that lawmakers can properly consider Bowser’s proposal for a full repeal of Initiative 82 (which would decrease the tipped wage back down to $5.95), but also because of the Republicans’ reconciliation bill making its way through Congress that would, among other things, exempt tips from federal taxation.

One critical vote for the three-month delay came from At-Large Councilmember Robert White. The former mayoral contender has been quiet on the fate of Initiative 82 as of late, while progressive activists have accused him of flip-flopping on a pledge he made during his mayoral run to respect the will of the voters who approved the measure in 2022. 

But White told me on Wednesday that he wants time for the council to more deeply consider how to help restaurants that say they are overburdened by labor costs and the workers who say their take-home pay has decreased because of Initiative 82.

“No matter what side of this debate you're on, a lot of people are taking home less money, right? A lot of restaurants are closing. Therefore, what do we do and how do we make it so that we're not losing as many restaurants and jobs?” he said. “The problem is that simple, but anybody pretending that there aren't two sides to this are not being straight up, so we've got to look at the data and understand what if anything we need to do to help restaurants adjust.”

In a back-and-forth with a progressive critic on social media, White responded to the accusations that he was breaking his promise to let Initiative 82 become the law of the land. “[If] new data and real experiences are presented my mind shouldn’t change? Leadership means staying open, especially when people are telling you a policy is hurting them,” he wrote.

Any next steps on Bowser’s proposed repeal of Initiative 82 remain murky, though. While her office and the restaurant industry is putting in a full-court press on repeal, White says he’d like to see the issue pulled out of her budget proposal and considered instead as a stand-alone bill. That, he says, would give the council more time to debate possible alternatives to help both restaurants and workers alike.

“I don’t know where the votes are with the repeal, and I think there will be conversations on some type of compromise,” said Council Chairman Phil Mendelson told reporters this week.

On the other hand, Initiative 82’s supporters say all the doom-and-gloom claims from the restaurant industry don’t hold up, pointing to a May report from the council’s own budget office that found restaurant employment in D.C. had reached pre-pandemic levels and that wages have also recovered.

“We have the data. We have the research. But more importantly, why would we make you all, the workers, be the ones to take the pause when you’re the one struggling trying to figure out how to make ends meet?” said Ward 4’s Janeese Lewis George during a demonstration alongside pro-I-82 workers outside the Wilson Building on Wednesday.

Saving D.C.'s sanctuary-city status

In other controversial budget-related moves, we reported last week that Bowser is pushing to repeal the city's official status as a "sanctuary city," the 2020 law the formally limits how much D.C. agencies can cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts.

But is seems unlikely that she will be getting much help from the council on that, at least according to Mendelson.

"If I asked members for a show of hands, 'How many of you are enthusiastic about repealing this?', I wouldn’t get any hands. It’s too soon to predict what will happen, but the mayor should have sent that as a freestanding bill. I can’t help but feel that it’s tucked in a 300-page [budget bill] in the hopes that no one notices," he said when asked about the provision on Monday.

The proposed repeal also drew condemnation from Lewis George, who represents portions of Northwest D.C. with large immigrant populations.

"For a half decade, D.C.’s sanctuary policies have protected our immigrant neighbors, family members, and friends from the overreach of ICE," she tweeted. "As we see rogue immigrant agents disappearing people off the streets and grabbing political prisoners, we know it’s our sanctuary policies that keep our neighbors safe. Despite our mayor’s willingness, we will not capitulate to Trump’s xenophobia."

Immigrant advocates were present at the Wilson Building this week to press the council to reject Bowser's proposed repeal.

"Instilling fear of police interaction within a community that is uniquely vulnerable to crime will not further public safety," said Ariana Smith, a staff attorney with Ayuda during testimony to the council. "To the contrary, it will give a free pass to those who commit horrific crimes against immigrant community members, knowing that the victims will not make police reports out of fear of adverse immigration action."

Save the date (for a budget vote)

For those who celebrate, Mendelson has set dates for the two votes on the 2026 budget: July 14 and July 28. For public input, council hearings are ongoing (see a full schedule here), but the main public hearing in the Committee of the Whole is set for June 18.