The California Department of Justice (DOJ) seized 26 Racing-on-Demand terminals from Santa Anita Park, which allow pari-mutuel wagering on previously run horse races, sparking a legal battle. Santa Anita filed suit against Attorney General Rob Bonta, arguing the seizure was unlawful and that the machines operate under the legal “3 X 3” wager approved by the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) in 2024. The state DOJ counters that the machines were illegal gambling devices visible in plain sight, justifying seizure without a warrant, and denies approving wagering on concluded races via these terminals. A trial conference is set for April 30, with the case potentially dragging on for months or longer.
Legal expert I. Nelson Rose highlights two key issues: whether the CHRB or courts have authority to decide on the wager’s legality, and whether the machines constitute a game of skill or illegal lottery. Santa Anita claims the machines are akin to approved tote terminals and rely on a 2006 legislative counsel opinion deeming similar “Instant Racing” machines as games of skill. However, the presence of quick-pick options undermines the skill argument, and the Attorney General disputes the machines’ legality. The courts may defer to the CHRB for a ruling, but the case raises broader questions about regulatory authority and the definition of permissible pari-mutuel wagering in California.
