New Jersey Senate Bill S3063

New Jersey 2024-2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/8/24
• Refer: 4/8/24

Caption

Permits civil liability against casinos and simulcast facilities for reckless indifference or intentional misconduct toward persons self-excluded from gaming activities.

Impact

The bill marks a significant change in the landscape of gambling regulations in New Jersey, as it transitions casinos from a position of blanket immunity concerning the self-exclusion program to one with potential civil accountability. The intent behind this legislative move is to enhance protections for individuals seeking to avoid the harms associated with gambling addiction, ensuring that casinos adhere to their responsibilities under the self-exclusion framework. If passed, the bill would enable individuals to pursue claims against casinos and simulcasting facilities if they experience additional harm due to the establishments' failures in enforcing their self-exclusion provisions.

Summary

Senate Bill S3063 introduces measures that hold casinos and simulcast facilities liable for reckless indifference or intentional misconduct toward individuals who have voluntarily self-excluded themselves from gambling activities. The bill amends existing regulations pertaining to the New Jersey Casino Self-Exclusion Program, which was initially established in 2001 to assist individuals struggling with gambling addiction by allowing them to voluntarily exclude themselves from all Atlantic City casinos and, later, online gambling. With the expanded civil liability outlined in S3063, those who are self-excluded may seek legal recourse if they are permitted to engage in gaming activities during their exclusion period due to the negligence of the facilities.

Contention

While supporters of S3063 argue it is a necessary step toward safeguarding vulnerable individuals from gambling addiction, detractors might consider potential unintended consequences, such as increased operational costs for casinos to comply with the heightened liability standards. Concerns have been raised regarding how these changes may alter the relationship between casinos and self-excluded individuals and whether this might lead to excessive litigation, ultimately placing a burden on the casino industry. Critics may argue that implementing additional layers of civil liability might disincentivize casinos from providing services to self-excluded individuals, as they navigate the complexities of statutory compliance with the new regulations.