The Guardian Governor: Protecting Sports Gaming Integrity or Overstepping his Authority?
Summary
- On July 31, 2025, Governor Mike DeWine urged the Ohio Casino Control Commission (OCCC) to ban all proposition bets in Ohio.
- This follows an MLB investigation involving Cleveland Guardians players and earlier concerns about threats to college athletes.
- The OCCC previously banned prop bets on individual college athletes, citing its authority under Ohio law.
- Governor DeWine’s request raises legal questions about whether the OCCC can ban an entire category of wagers defined as legal by statute.
In a press release on July 31, 2025, Governor DeWine called on the Ohio Casino Control Commission (OCCC) to remove proposition bets from the list of legal bets that can be placed in Ohio. State law defines "proposition bets" (also known as prop bets) as a “wager on a sporting event that is based on whether an identified instance or statistical achievement will occur, will be achieved, or will be surpassed, other than the score or outcome of the sporting event or parts of the sporting event, such as quarters, halves, periods, or innings".
The governor’s directive is directly tied to the gambling-related investigation into two Cleveland Guardians pitchers by Major League Baseball. In the release, Governor DeWine claims that “the harm to athletes and the integrity of the game is clear, and the benefits are not worth the harm. The prop betting experiment in this country has failed badly.”
In fact, this is the second time Governor DeWine has taken umbrage with prop bets. The first instance was in response to threats directed at college athletes at the University of Dayton. The executive director of the OCCC responded to those threats by stating that the OCCC has the discretion to impose a lifetime ban on anyone who threatens athletes.
Later, at the request of the NCAA, the OCCC made Ohio one of several states to ban bets on an individual college athlete’s performance. Since many prop bets are based on an individual’s performance, this eliminated a large swath of these bets in college sports, along with straight bets on individual sports, such as golf or tennis.
When the OCCC issued its decision eliminating bets on individual athletes in college sports, it cited Ohio Revised Code 3775.02(C)(3) and Ohio Adm. Code 3775-11-01(D) as its authority for doing so. ORC 3775.02(C), in relevant part, states:
The commission may, independently or at the request of any person, including a sports governing body, adopt rules to prohibit or restrict sports gaming proprietors from accepting wagers on a particular sporting event or to prohibit or restrict sports gaming proprietors from accepting a particular type of wager.
The relevant part of the statute for purposes of Governor DeWine’s call to action is that OCCC may prohibit sports gaming proprietors from “accepting a particular type of wager.” When the OCCC exercised this authority before, it banned a subset of proposition bets, those on individual athletes. Now the governor is asking to ban these prop bets as an entire class of wager.
Putting aside the question of whether the governor’s request is simply a knee-jerk reaction to an ongoing investigation or if the investigation is a convenient cover for the administration to reign in an industry it seems to regret authorizing in Ohio, there is an even more interesting question to be asked: is the governor overstepping his authority by potentially asking an administrative agency to usurp the authority of the legislature? Or is he simply trying to protect sports gaming integrity in Ohio? The answer is not determined easily.
The OCCC is a creature of statute and as such has only those powers conferred upon it by the General Assembly, whose purpose is to draft and pass legislation for the State of Ohio. When the General Assembly passes legislation, it goes to the governor’s desk where he can either sign it into law or veto it. (Anyone else remember the Schoolhouse Rock! song I’m Just a Bill?)
Accordingly, the governor does not have the ability to veto a law after he has already signed it into law just because he has second thoughts. Yet, that is exactly what he seems to be trying to accomplish here through the OCCC.
It is important to note that the definition of “sports gaming” under Ohio law expressly includes proposition bets and that Ohio law authorizes sports gaming as regulated by the OCCC. Governor DeWine is asking the OCCC to ban proposition bets in Ohio entirely, not just a type of proposition bet like the OCCC did in response to the NCAA request.
Put another way, the governor is asking the OCCC to ignore the statutory definition of sports gaming created by the General Assembly and approved by the governor. Instead, he is endeavoring to limit the authorized forms of sports gaming in the state to only those with which he is comfortable. This puts the OCCC in a difficult position.
Ordinarily, the OCCC has no authority whatsoever to rewrite legislation. However, the wording of ORC 3775.02(C) empowers the OCCC to prohibit or restrict “a particular type of wager.” Is that language broad enough to empower the OCCC to ignore the General Assembly’s definition of sports gaming and limit an entire category of sports gaming in the state? Further, is the underlying statute, which gives the OCCC plenary authority to prohibit acceptance of a particular type of wager, an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority to an executive branch agency? It remains to be seen how the OCCC responds and what challenges, if any, the industry may bring directly if the OCCC embraces the governor’s call.
