The Public Health Advocacy Institute (PHAI) recently filed a lawsuit against the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, claiming it has failed to meet its legal obligation to collect and share casino data with researchers as outlined in the 2011 Expanded Gaming Act. Filed in Suffolk Superior Court, the suit seeks a Mandamus Order compelling the Commission to fulfill its responsibilities under Section 97 of the Act, which mandates that casino operators provide anonymized data to inform public health research on gambling’s impact.
The lawsuit marks another step in PHAI’s ongoing efforts to hold the gaming industry accountable for gambling-related harms. According to the advocacy organization, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission has been obligated to collect this data since its formation over a decade ago, yet has failed to secure or distribute any behavioral data from casino operators in the state. PHAI contends that sharing this information with researchers is crucial for identifying harm patterns, studying the impacts of gambling, and potentially implementing measures to mitigate these risks.
PHAI Calls for Data to Address Gambling-Related Harm
Under Section 97 of the Expanded Gaming Act, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission is required to facilitate research by collecting customer data from licensed casinos and making this anonymized information accessible to qualified researchers. PHAI President Richard Daynard, a distinguished law professor at Northeastern University, stressed in a press release that such data should have been available long ago, especially given the recent surge in sports gambling within the Commonwealth. “Not only should this casino data have been made available years ago,” he stated, “but this is exactly the kind of data requirement that should be imposed on sports gambling, which has exploded here in the past 20 months.”
PHAI argues that such research is vital in curbing the adverse effects associated with gambling, as the information could be used to develop harm reduction strategies, better understand patterns of gambling addiction, and inform more robust regulatory frameworks.
Commission’s Decade-Long Delay Draws Legal Action
Despite the Massachusetts casino industry being active since 2015, the Gaming Commission has allegedly never collected or shared the required data with research bodies, according to PHAI. The complaint outlines that three major casino operators—Plainridge Park Casino, MGM Springfield, and Encore Boston Harbor—have consistently gathered data through loyalty programs and tracking systems but have yet to make this information accessible to researchers. PHAI Executive Director Mark Gottlieb expressed frustration at the Commission’s lack of action, noting, “The requirement for the Gaming Commission to make this important research data available has been in place since the day the Commission was created more than a decade ago.”
The lawsuit contends that this inaction violates the 2011 legislation’s clear directives, and PHAI has spent the past two years urging the Commission to comply. With legal proceedings underway, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission has 20 days to respond to the suit and justify why it should not be compelled to collect and distribute the data. Should the court grant PHAI’s request, the Commission would finally be obligated to uphold its mandate, providing researchers with the data needed to study gambling’s public health impact.
PHAI has a notable history of using litigation to address public health risks associated with gambling and other industries. In December 2023, its Center for Public Health Litigation filed a class action lawsuit against DraftKings, alleging deceptive advertising and unfair marketing practices. The case, which garnered national media coverage, was allowed to proceed following a Massachusetts judge’s decision to deny DraftKings’ motion to dismiss. Additionally, PHAI played a key role in introducing the SAFE Bet Act in September 2024, a pioneering federal initiative aimed at regulating mobile sports betting across the United States, reflecting the organization’s commitment to pushing for more comprehensive oversight of the gambling industry.
