How a 2018 Supreme Court decision paved the way for meteoric growth in legal sports betting

To place an obituary, please email the following information to obits@pioneerpress.com. Note that there is no option to place obituaries through our website. For any questions, feel free to contact our obituary desk at 651-228-5263.

**General Information:**
– Your full name
– Address (City, State, Zip Code)
– Phone number
– Alternate phone number (if any)

**Obituary Specifications:**
– Name of the deceased
– Obituary text
– A photo in JPEG or PDF format is preferred; TIF and other files are accepted. We will contact you if there are any issues with the photo.
– Ad run dates

There is a discount for running the obituary more than one day, but this must be scheduled on the first run date to apply. If a photo is used, it must be published on all run dates to qualify for the discount. Please contact us for more information.

**Policies:**
**Verification of Death:** To publish an obituary, we require the name and phone number of the funeral home or cremation society handling the arrangements. We must contact them during business hours to verify the death.

If the deceased’s body has been donated to the University of Minnesota Anatomy Bequest Program or a similar program, please provide their phone number for verification. Allow enough time for us to contact them, especially on weekends when hours may be limited.

Alternatively, a death certificate is acceptable for verification—only one of these two options is required.

**Guestbook and Outside Websites:**
We do not allow references to other media sources with guestbooks or obituaries placed elsewhere. We may include a funeral home website or a family email for contact instead. Contact us if you have questions about this policy.

**Obituary Process:**
Once your submission is complete, we will fax or email a proof for your review prior to publication. This proof includes the price and scheduled run dates. Please review it carefully. Notify us of any errors or changes before the notice appears in the Pioneer Press by the deadlines for each day. After publication, we are not responsible for errors missed during final proofing.

**Online Obituaries:**
Changes to online obituaries may be handled through the obituary desk. Contact us for details.

**Payment Procedure:**
Pre-payment is required for all obituary notices before the publication deadline. Payment methods include:
– Credit Card: Accepted by phone only (due to PCI regulations)
– EFT: Provide routing and account numbers by phone
– Cash: Accepted at our front counter Monday to Friday, 8:00 AM to 3:30 PM

Call 651-228-5263 with your payment information after you have reviewed and approved the proof.

**Rates:**
– Minimum charge: $162 for the first 10 lines
– Each additional line after the first 10: $12.20
– Ads under 10 lines are charged the minimum rate of $162
– For a second run date, the cost is $8.20 per line from the first line
– Each photo published costs $125 per day

For example, a 20-line ad on the first run date costs $164. Two photos published for two days would be charged as four photo charges totaling $500.

**Deadlines:**
Please adhere to deadlines to ensure your obituary is published on the requested day.

**Memoriam (Non-Obituary) Requests:**
Memoriam submissions are remembrances of loved ones and have different rates from obituaries. For more information, please email memoriams@pioneerpress.com or call 651-228-5280.

**Hours:** Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM (closed weekends and holidays).

### Supreme Court Decision on Sports Betting Explained

By Mark Sherman, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — A 2018 Supreme Court decision opened the floodgates for the legalized sports-betting industry, now worth billions of dollars a year, despite controversy surrounding the ruling. This decision is back in the spotlight following arrests of more than 30 people, including an NBA player and coach, as part of investigations into criminal schemes involving rigged sports bets and poker games linked to Mafia families.

**What Did the Supreme Court Decide?**
The court struck down a 1992 federal law, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), which barred betting on football, basketball, baseball, and other sports in most states. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, stated that the way Congress prohibited states from authorizing sports betting violated the Constitution’s Tenth Amendment, which protects states’ powers.

“The legalization of sports gambling requires an important policy choice, but the choice is not ours to make,” Alito wrote. He added that the court’s role is to interpret whether the law Congress enacted aligns with the Constitution—and PASPA did not.

The trouble, Alito explained, was that Congress did not make sports betting a federal crime but instead barred states from legalizing it, infringing upon their authority.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy, Neil Gorsuch, and Elena Kagan joined Alito’s opinion.

**Dissenting Views**
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented, arguing that the court should have invalidated only the part of the law restricting states and preserved the rest, especially provisions affecting private parties and betting schemes. Writing for Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer, she highlighted that courts generally seek to salvage rather than demolish a law. Breyer agreed that parts of the law should be struck down but disagreed that the entire law should fail.

Alito countered that Congress did not intend for the provisions to be treated separately.

**Concerns About Corruption**
Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, a former NBA star, sponsored PASPA to protect against the dangers of sports betting. Major professional sports leagues and the NCAA urged the court to uphold the law, fearing gambling would harm the integrity of their games. They also highlighted the additional resources needed to monitor betting patterns and investigate suspicious activity. The Trump administration supported maintaining the ban.

Alito acknowledged the controversy around legal sports gambling, citing historical scandals such as the 1919 “Black Sox Scandal” and 1950s college basketball point-shaving schemes as examples of risks to sports integrity.

Nevertheless, he concluded that Congress could not require states to maintain prohibitions against sports betting.

Originally published: October 24, 2025 at 11:10 AM CDT.
https://www.twincities.com/2025/10/24/sports-betting-supreme-court/

Defamation case: Bathinda court directs Kangana to appear in October

The court has ordered Kangana Ranaut to appear physically on October 27. The summons will be served through the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP).

### Background of the Case

The case dates back to January 2021, when Ranaut allegedly defamed an elderly woman farmer on social media during the farmers’ agitation.

### Allegations and Complainant

The defamation complaint was filed by Mahinder Kaur, a 73-year-old resident of Bahadurgarh Jandian village in Bathinda. She alleged that Ranaut had defamed her in a social media post by mistakenly identifying her as Shaheen Bagh protester Bilkis Bano.

Ranaut’s tweet read, “She is the same daadi who featured in Time magazine for being the most powerful Indian. And she is available in 100.”

Feeling harmed by these remarks, Kaur filed the case on January 4, 2021, claiming damage to her reputation.

### Legal Proceedings

In February 2022, the Bathinda court issued summons to Ranaut. Following this, Ranaut approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking relief; however, her petition was dismissed.

She then moved the Supreme Court, which also refused to intervene and upheld the lower court’s order.

Ranaut maintained that she had only reposted a lawyer’s social media post without making any independent remarks. Despite this, the Bathinda court found sufficient grounds to continue the proceedings and rejected her plea for a virtual appearance.

### Supreme Court’s Comments

Earlier this month, Supreme Court Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta commented on the case during proceedings. The bench observed,

*”It was not a simple retweet. You have added spice. What this means is a subject matter of trial. Don’t ask us to comment on what is written in the tweet. It may prejudice your trial.”*

The judges noted that the Member of Parliament from Mandi had not merely shared the tweet but had added her own comment, which is central to the trial.

The upcoming court date will be critical in determining the next steps in this ongoing defamation case involving Kangana Ranaut.
https://www.newsbytesapp.com/news/entertainment/bathinda-court-summons-kangana-in-october-in-defamation-case/story

SC Clears New AIFF Constitution, Calls It A ‘New Beginning’ For Indian Football

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday approved the draft constitution of the All India Football Federation (AIFF) with certain modifications and directed the federation to adopt it within four weeks.

The top court described this development as a “new beginning for Indian football,” poised to take the sport to greater heights. It also ordered the AIFF to convene a special general body meeting to adopt the draft constitution, which was prepared by former Supreme Court judge L Nageswara Rao.

### Supreme Court’s Observations

A bench comprising Justices P S Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi stated, “We have approved the provisions of the constitution in the said terms. We direct the AIFF administration to call for a special general body meeting and adopt the draft constitution with the modifications in this judgment. This shall be done at the earliest, preferably within four weeks.”

The 78-page verdict, authored by Justice Narasimha, addressed 12 key issues including membership, suspension, age restrictions, and conflict of interest concerning both the AIFF and state football associations.

### Applicability to State Associations

The Supreme Court clarified that the draft constitution is applicable to state associations as well, despite their resistance. The bench emphasized, “The inclusion of eminent players, coaches, referees, and club representatives in the general body, with only further good governance, heralds transparency and fair play.”

The court further remarked that continuous monitoring of a sports federation by any external forum — including the Supreme Court — is inappropriate. “Having taken up the matter and ensured that the Constitution is brought to this stage, it is necessary to take it to its logical end. Our monitoring will only be that far and no further,” the bench said.

### Current Executive Committee Tenure

The court declined to interfere with the tenure of the current AIFF executive committee led by President Kalyan Chaubey. It noted that the committee was elected for a four-year term, set to expire in September 2026.

“The current executive committee can be treated as a permanent body which shall discharge its function in accordance with the relevant laws as well as the AIFF constitution,” the verdict added.

### Governance and Structure

On the issue of extending the AIFF constitution to state associations, the bench stressed the importance of maintaining the hierarchical pyramidical structure of Indian football. All constituent units and associations lower in hierarchy must observe the same discipline, transparency, fairness, and governance standards applied at the top level.

Referring to the FIFA statute and insights from Justice L N Rao, the court stated, “We are not inclined to accept the argument that the AIFF Constitution ought not to be extended to the state associations and local bodies.”

### Modifications to Eligibility Criteria

The Supreme Court modified the criteria for an “eminent player” eligible to be a member of the AIFF executive committee. The player must be retired for at least two years and have represented India’s senior national team in at least seven competitive matches for men or three for women sanctioned by FIFA/AFC.

However, the court proposed reducing these criteria to five matches for men and two for women to ensure a wider pool of participation by retired players who can serve as efficient administrators and mentors for Indian football.

### Definition of Office Bearers and Vice Presidents

The bench clarified that the term “office bearers” should be understood in the context of AIFF’s functioning and the reforms to be introduced. This definition directly affects the applicability of cooling-off periods, tenure, and age limits, aligning with the federation’s drive for vibrant governance.

Further, the court accepted AIFF’s proposal to increase the number of vice presidents to three, including at least one woman. “Such an amendment will enable women’s representation and, at the same time, confine the number of the executive committee to fifteen members,” the verdict noted.

### Disqualification Norms

Regarding disqualification criteria, the verdict incorporated provisions on criminal charges and convictions of AIFF and state association members. It aligned these norms with those applied in the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) case.

The court modified the disqualification provision to focus on “conviction followed by a sentence of imprisonment,” rather than merely the framing of charges.

The bench also stated that public servants with necessary government approval should face no obstacles in becoming members of the football body.

### Other Modifications

Several other amendments were made to the draft constitution to align it with the National Sports Code, ensuring uniformity and compliance with national standards.

*Note: Except for the headline, this article has not been edited by FPJ’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.*
https://www.freepressjournal.in/sports/sc-clears-new-aiff-constitution-calls-it-a-new-beginning-for-indian-football

SC Clears New AIFF Constitution, Calls It A ‘New Beginning’ For Indian Football

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday approved the draft constitution of the All India Football Federation (AIFF) with certain changes and directed the federation to adopt it within four weeks. The top court termed this development a “new beginning for Indian football,” poised to take the sport to greater heights.

The court directed the national football body to convene a special general body meeting for adopting the draft constitution prepared by its former judge, L Nageswara Rao.

### Observations Made by the Bench

“We have approved the provisions of the constitution in the said terms. We direct the AIFF administration to call for a special general body meeting and adopt the draft constitution with the modifications in this judgment. This shall be done at the earliest, preferably within four weeks,” stated a bench comprising Justices P S Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi.

The 78-page verdict, authored by Justice Narasimha, addressed 12 critical issues including membership, suspension, age bar, and conflict of interest related to AIFF and state football associations.

### Applicability to State Associations

The Supreme Court clarified that the draft constitution will also apply to state associations, despite their resistance. The bench emphasized that the inclusion of eminent players, coaches, referees, and club representatives in the general body will usher in greater transparency and fair play.

It observed, “The inclusion of eminent players, coaches, referees, and club representatives in the general body, with only further good governance, heralds transparency and fair play.”

The bench further noted that continuous monitoring of a sports federation by any forum, including the Supreme Court, is not appropriate. “Having taken up the matter and ensured that the Constitution is brought to this stage, it is necessary to take it to its logical end. Our monitoring will only be that far and no further,” it added.

### Tenure of Current Executive Committee

The court refused to interfere with the tenure of the current AIFF executive committee headed by President Kalyan Chaubey. It stated that since the committee was elected for a four-year term, their tenure will expire in September 2026—less than a year from now.

“The current executive committee can be treated as a permanent body which shall discharge its function in accordance with the relevant laws as well as the AIFF constitution,” the bench observed.

### Enforcing Discipline Across All Levels

Addressing the contentious issue of applicability of the AIFF constitution to state associations, the bench stressed the importance of maintaining a pyramidal structure of Indian football. It said constituent units and lower-level associations must implement the same discipline, fairness, transparency, and good governance standards applied at the top.

“In view of the FIFA statute, the relevant comments of Justice L N Rao and on analysis of the far-reaching implications of this provision, we are not inclined to accept the argument that the AIFF Constitution ought not be extended to the state associations and local bodies,” the court stated.

### Modifications to Criteria for “Eminent Player”

The Supreme Court modified the criteria for the “eminent player” who is a member of the AIFF executive committee. The revised criteria specify that the player should be retired for at least two years and must have represented India (senior team) in at least seven competitive matches for men and three for women, sanctioned by FIFA/AFC.

However, the bench proposed a reasonable reduction: five matches for men and two for women, to ensure a wider pool of retired players actively participating as efficient administrators and guiding lights for Indian football.

### Definition of “Office Bearers” and Governance Reforms

The bench emphasized that the term “office bearers” must be understood in the context of AIFF’s functioning and necessary reforms. This definition will impact the applicability of cooling-off periods, terms, tenure, and age limits, aligning with reforms introduced for vibrant federation governance.

### Women’s Representation and Vice Presidents

Accepted AIFF’s proposal to increase the number of vice presidents to three, including one woman representative. This amendment aims to strengthen women’s representation while keeping the executive committee size to fifteen members.

### Disqualification Norms and Other Modifications

On disqualification issues, including criminal charges and convictions of AIFF and state association members, the bench adopted standards similar to those in the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) case. It modified disqualification provisions to apply only upon conviction followed by imprisonment, not merely on framing of charges.

The Supreme Court also stated that public servants with necessary government approvals can become members of the football body without issues.

Several other modifications were incorporated into the draft constitution to align it with the National Sports Code.

*Note: Except for the headline, this article has not been edited by FPJ’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.*
https://www.freepressjournal.in/sports/sc-clears-new-aiff-constitution-calls-it-a-new-beginning-for-indian-football

Exit mobile version