The Public Health Advocacy Institute (PHAI) has filed a lawsuit against the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, alleging the commission has failed to meet a key gambling data requirement under the 2011 Expanded Gaming Act. Filed in Massachusetts Superior Court, the suit seeks a Mandamus Order that would compel the Commission to collect and share behavioral data from state casino operators.
According to the suit, the Gaming Commission has not fulfilled its responsibility under Section 97 of the Expanded Gaming Act, which mandates it to gather anonymized customer data from casino operators. This information is intended to help researchers understand the impacts of casino practices, identify at-risk groups, and inform measures to mitigate problem gambling.
Richard Daynard, PHAI President and Northeastern University law professor, criticized the Commission’s prolonged inaction: “Not only should this casino data have been made available years ago, but this is exactly the kind of data requirement that should be imposed on sports gambling, which has exploded here in the past 20 months.” Daynard also noted PHAI’s intention to work with Massachusetts lawmakers to implement similar requirements for the sports betting sector.
Section 97 has required the Commission to collect data on player behavior since 2011, but to date, no data has been collected or provided to researchers. The lawsuit contends that despite nearly two years of urging from PHAI, the Commission has made little progress in meeting this legal obligation. Should the court issue a Mandamus Order, the Commission would be legally compelled to begin data collection.
PHAI’s Executive Director, Mark Gottlieb, voiced frustration over the delay: “The requirement for the Gaming Commission to make this important research data available has been in place since the day the Commission was created more than a decade ago. All of our casinos have been operating for half a decade, and only now—after two years of nudging from PHAI—the Commission finally claims to be getting closer to meeting its obligations.”
Dr. Harry Levant, PHAI’s Director of Gambling Policy, also underscored the public health implications of this data. He stated that the availability of anonymized player data could provide valuable insights into reducing gambling-related harm, adding that such information would benefit regulatory practices both in Massachusetts and other states.
The court filing, led by PHAI attorneys Andrew Rainer and Jacob Wolk, asserts that Massachusetts’ data-collection mandate represents a pioneering approach to tracking and mitigating gambling-related harm. The suit alleges that the Gaming Commission has failed to comply with its unambiguous statutory obligation to collect this data from the casinos and provide it to qualified researchers.
The Commission now has 20 days to respond to the lawsuit, providing an explanation as to why a Mandamus Order should not be granted.
This is not the first time the PHAI has launched public health litigation related to problem gambling. In December 2023, PHAI’s Center for Public Health Litigation launched a class-action lawsuit against DraftKings over alleged deceptive advertising practices. The case gained national attention, with coverage by major media outlets, including 60 Minutes. In August, a Massachusetts judge denied DraftKings’ motion to dismiss, allowing the suit to proceed.
As for the Massachusetts Gaming Commission’s inaction in gathering data from gamblers, it should be noted the regulator earlier this month said it would be finally moving forward with the long-stalled collection project.
Gaming regulators noted that they navigated through several hurdles over the last 13 years in their efforts to move forward with the data collection, including an initial wait until all casinos were operational, changes in the Commission’s structure, and pandemic-related delays.