FEDERAL · 15 U.S.C. · Chapter 57
Regulation of interstate off-track wagering
15 U.S.C. § 3004
Title15 — Commerce and Trade
Chapter57 — INTERSTATE HORSERACING
This text of 15 U.S.C. § 3004 (Regulation of interstate off-track wagering) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
15 U.S.C. § 3004.
Text
(a)Consent of host racing association, host racing commission, and off-track racing commission as prerequisite to acceptance of wager
An interstate off-track wager may be accepted by an off-track betting system only if consent is obtained from—
(1)the host racing association, except that—
(A)as a condition precedent to such consent, said racing association (except a not-for-profit racing association in a State where the distribution of off-track betting revenues in that State is set forth by law) must have a written agreement with the horsemen's group, under which said racing association may give such consent, setting forth the terms and conditions relating thereto; provided,
(B)that where the host racing association has a contract with a horsemen's group at the time of enactment of th
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Sterling Suffolk Racecourse Limited Partnership v. Burrillville Racing Association, Inc.
989 F.2d 1266 (First Circuit, 1993)
Churchill Downs Inc. v. Thoroughbred Horsemen's Group, LLC
605 F. Supp. 2d 870 (W.D. Kentucky, 2009)
In Re New York City Off-Track Betting Corp.
434 B.R. 131 (S.D. New York, 2010)
Monarch Content Management LLC v. Arizona Department of Gaming
971 F.3d 1021 (Ninth Circuit, 2020)
New Suffolk Downs Corp. v. Rockingham Venture, Inc.
656 F. Supp. 1190 (D. New Hampshire, 1987)
Sterling Suffolk Racecourse Ltd. Partnership v. Burrillville Racing Ass'n
802 F. Supp. 662 (D. Rhode Island, 1992)
Gulfstream Park Racing Ass'n, Inc. v. Tampa Bay Downs, Inc.
294 F. Supp. 2d 1291 (M.D. Florida, 2003)
Cloverleaf Enterprises, Inc. v. Maryland Thoroughbred, Horsemen's Ass'n
730 F. Supp. 2d 451 (D. Maryland, 2010)
(1997)
82 Op. Att'y Gen. 131 (Maryland Attorney General Reports, 1997)
(2001)
86 Op. Att'y Gen. 132 (Maryland Attorney General Reports, 2001)
New Mexico Horsemen's Association v. Sunray Gaming of New Mexico, LLC
(D. New Mexico, 2025)
New Mexico Horsemen's Association v. Bregman
(D. New Mexico, 2022)
Churchill Downs Technology Initiatives Company v. Michigan Gaming Control Board
(W.D. Michigan, 2025)
Opinion No. (2002)
(Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 2002)
Churchill Downs Tech. Initiatives Co. v. Mich. Gaming Control Bd.
(Sixth Circuit, 2025)
Source Credit
History
(Pub. L. 95–515, §5, Oct. 25, 1978, 92 Stat. 1813.)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
15 U.S.C. § 3004, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/15/3004.