FEDERAL · 31 U.S.C. · Chapter SUBCHAPTER IV—PROHIBITION ON FUNDING OF UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING
Prohibition on acceptance of any financial instrument for unlawful Internet gambling
31 U.S.C. § 5363
Title31 — Money and Finance
ChapterSUBCHAPTER IV—PROHIBITION ON FUNDING OF UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING
This text of 31 U.S.C. § 5363 (Prohibition on acceptance of any financial instrument for unlawful Internet gambling) 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
31 U.S.C. § 5363.
Text
No person engaged in the business of betting or wagering may knowingly accept, in connection with the participation of another person in unlawful Internet gambling—
(1)credit, or the proceeds of credit, extended to or on behalf of such other person (including credit extended through the use of a credit card);
(2)an electronic fund transfer, or funds transmitted by or through a money transmitting business, or the proceeds of an electronic fund transfer or money transmitting service, from or on behalf of such other person;
(3)any check, draft, or similar instrument which is drawn by or on behalf of such other person and is drawn on or payable at or through any financial institution; or
(4)the proceeds of any other form of financial transaction, as the Secretary and the Board of Governors
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
United States v. Lyons
740 F.3d 702 (D.C. Circuit, 2014)
United States v. Rubin
743 F.3d 31 (Second Circuit, 2014)
Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Ass'n v. Attorney General of the United States
580 F.3d 113 (Third Circuit, 2009)
State of California v. Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel
898 F.3d 960 (Ninth Circuit, 2018)
In Re Baum
386 B.R. 649 (N.D. Ohio, 2008)
West Flagler Associates, Ltd. v. Debra Haaland
71 F.4th 1059 (D.C. Circuit, 2023)
Rousso v. State
204 P.3d 243 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2009)
United States v. Dicristina
886 F. Supp. 2d 164 (E.D. New York, 2012)
United States v. Lyons
870 F. Supp. 2d 281 (D. Massachusetts, 2012)
United States v. Ayo
801 F. Supp. 2d 1323 (S.D. Alabama, 2011)
Whether Proposals by Illinois and New York to Use the Internet and Out-of-State Transaction Processors to Sell Lottery Tickets to In-State Adults Violate the Wire Act
(Office of Legal Counsel, 2011)
Yaniv De Ridder, et al. v. Roblox Corporation, et al.
(N.D. California, 2025)
California Attorney General Opinion 23-1001
(California Attorney General Reports, 2025)
United States v. Lyons
(First Circuit, 2014)
Whether the Wire Act Applies to Non-Sports Gambling
(Office of Legal Counsel, 2011)
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
(Texas Attorney General Reports, 2012)
Source Credit
History
(Added Pub. L. 109–347, title VIII, §802(a), Oct. 13, 2006, 120 Stat. 1957.)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
31 U.S.C. § 5363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/31/5363.