Pennsylvania Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Skill Games
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is preparing a pivotal ruling on the legality of so-called skill games, machines that resemble slots but claim to rely on player ability. The decision could redefine how these devices are treated under state gambling law.
The outcome will have major implications for small businesses that host the machines, the regulated casino industry, and Pennsylvania’s tax revenues, potentially setting a precedent for other states.
1.0
Default
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Ruling Could Redefine Skill-Game Legality
Pennsylvania’s long-running battle over the legality of so-called “skill games” has reached a pivotal moment, as the state Supreme Court prepares to issue a ruling that could reshape the future of the machines statewide. The decision is expected to bring long-awaited clarity to an industry operating in a legal gray area.
Why skill games are being debated
Skill games are touchscreen machines that resemble traditional slot machines but claim to rely on a player’s ability to recognize patterns or make strategic choices to win. Unlike regulated casino slots, these devices operate outside Pennsylvania’s gambling laws, creating a major point of contention.
Supporters argue the games require genuine skill and provide important revenue for small businesses. Critics counter that they function like unlicensed gambling machines, lack consumer protections, and undercut the state’s regulated gaming industry.
What’s at stake legally
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s ruling will determine whether skill games are classified as gambling machines under state law. If the court finds that the skill element is significant enough to set them apart from traditional slots, the machines could remain legal.
However, if they are deemed gambling devices, they would fall under Pennsylvania’s Games-of-Chance regulations, potentially restricting or prohibiting their operation. That means they would require licensing, taxation, and regulatory oversight, with rules that most existing operators do not meet.
Many small businesses rely on the revenue these machines generate, so a decision either way would have significant financial and operational consequences. On the other hand, these machines represent a potential loss in taxable revenue for the state of Pennsylvania, which is why this is a contentious issue.
What comes next
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court heard arguments on the skill-games case in late November, marking the final stage before justices issue their ruling. A decision is expected in the coming weeks, likely before the end of the year.
Whatever the outcome, the ruling is poised to reshape the regulatory landscape for skill-game operators across the state, bringing long-awaited clarity to a rapidly growing but legally uncertain industry.
How a ruling could shape Pennsylvania’s gaming landscape
Beyond determining the fate of skill games themselves, the court’s decision could set a broader precedent for how Pennsylvania handles emerging forms of gaming. As new technologies blur the line between entertainment and gambling, regulators may need to reassess how these products fit within existing laws.
A clear ruling could either reinforce the state’s current regulatory framework or spark renewed efforts to modernize gaming statutes, influencing not just skill-game operators but future platforms seeking to enter the market.
How other states are dealing with skill-game disputes
Several states are confronting similar battles over the legality of skill-based gaming machines, reflecting a nationwide struggle to differentiate “skill” and gambling.
- Virginia: Banned skill games in 2021, but the move has triggered ongoing court fights from manufacturers and small businesses.
- Kentucky: Banned skill games in 2023 after intense lobbying from casinos, small businesses, and machine manufacturers.
- North Carolina: Law enforcement continues to raid businesses operating “fish games” and other skill-style machines.
Like Pennsylvania, each of these states is grappling with whether these machines should be banned, regulated, or taxed. The outcome often hinges on how strictly lawmakers interpret the line between entertainment and gambling.