To Top

Michigan Court Rules in Favor of TwinSpires, Again

A Michigan court denied the MGCB’s appeal for a stay in TwinSpires’ preliminary injunction it was granted earlier this year.
mgcb twinspires court case
Photo by PeopleImages.com - Yuri A/Shutterstock
Corey Sharp Avatar
2 mins read
Share Share
Copy link Share on X Share on Facebook Share on Reddit Share via Email

Churchill Downs Incorporated, operating TwinSpires, scored another legal win against the Michigan Gaming Control Board last week. The Sixth Circuit Court in Michigan denied the MCGB’s appeal request to stay an injunction

Back in April, a federal judge also ruled against the MGCB’s stay request. TwinSpires was granted a preliminary injunction in February.

The MGCB had shut down advanced deposit wagering (ADW) on horse racing at the start of 2025 because there were no licensed racetracks in the state, until Northville Downs found a new location in Hastings. Twinspires was the only operator that didn’t comply with the order.

Federal law prevails

TwinSpires had the gall to remain open for business despite orders from the MGCB. The company claimed that it did not need to partner with Northville Downs, but did so in good faith.

Because of that TwinSpires is claiming MGCB violated Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978 (IHA), the Supremacy Clause and Interstate Commerce Clause of the US Constitution.

The Sixth Circuit Court has ruled in favor of TwinSpires, once again, explaining that federal law supersedes state law, according to SBC Americas:

“When ‘Congress enacts a law that imposes restrictions or confers rights on private actors,’ and ‘a state law confers rights or imposes restrictions that conflict with the federal law,’ ‘the federal law takes precedence and the state law is preempted.”

State’s view of IHA

The MGCB interpreted that the IHA was written to seek permission of where a bettor is located before placing a bet, in addition to governing legal pari-mutuel wagering. Wagers on unlicensed platforms are illegal, according to the MGCB.

The court did not agree, stating in its ruling:

“Defendants’ alternative interpretation would allow Michigan to regulate wagers on races already committed to the regulation of other states, which flatly contradicts the IHA’s express intent to ‘prevent interference by one State with the gambling policies of another,’ and to ‘“’ensure states will continue to cooperate with one another in the acceptance of legal interstate wagers.’”

TwinSpires and the MGCB are set to offer oral arguments in the appeal process. The court is determining a date for that to take place.

About the Author
VIEW ALL POSTS
Corey Sharp

Lead Writer

Corey Sharp joined Catena Media in 2022 and is the go-to expert for Michigan gambling. Born and raised in Philadelphia, PA, he previously worked for the Philadelphia Inquirer and NBC Sports Philadelphia as a sports journalist and content producer. In Corey’s role as Lead Writer for PlayMichigan, he works alongside a talented team of expert journalists and analysts to bring you the most comprehensive and accurate coverage of gambling news in Michigan. Corey’s contacts around the industry makes him a trusted source. Corey produces daily stories and features about the gambling space. Corey graduated from Holy Family University in Philadelphia with a bachelor’s degree in sports management.

VIEW ALL POSTS