A bill to tighten state gambling laws was defeated, but a push by lawmakers has brought it back to life
A proposal to tighten Rhode Island’s gambling laws is back in play after it was narrowly defeated just days ago. The bill, originally turned down by the House Judiciary Committee on April 22 in a 7-5 vote, aimed to make it a misdemeanor for individuals under 21 to participate in online gambling. Now, it’s being reconsidered—reviving a debate that has stirred controversy among lawmakers, civil rights advocates, and the public.
The push to revive the bill came after House Judiciary Committee Chairman Robert Craven confirmed that the legislation would return for a second look. According to Craven, the reconsideration is meant to give Rhode Island State Police Superintendent Col. Darnell Weaver or a representative another opportunity to argue why the law should pass. The state police requested the bill as part of their concern about gambling access for young adults using mobile devices.
Critics, however, haven’t backed down. Groups like the ACLU of Rhode Island and the Public Defender’s Office argue that the proposal unfairly targets 18- to 20-year-olds who are otherwise legally allowed to gamble in-person at state casinos. They worry that these individuals could unknowingly commit a crime by gambling online. Megan Jackson of the Public Defender’s Office said that rather than imposing a misdemeanor, a civil penalty paired with education on gambling risks would be a more effective and fair solution.
Some lawmakers are also questioning whether the process of reconsideration complies with House procedures. Rep. David Place raised concerns about whether the vote should have happened at an earlier meeting, citing parliamentary guidelines. But House spokesperson Larry Berman clarified that their internal rules allow for the move, so long as the bill remains with the committee and the motion is made by someone who voted in the majority.
The debate continues, and with a few committee members absent during the original vote now indicating they want in, the final outcome may be different the second time around.
