体育大事件——美国最高法院终结体育博彩禁令 分享到
US Supreme Court Ends Ban on Sports Betting 2018-05-1952294

中英
Việt-Anh
ไทย-อังกฤษ
英文

双击原文单词查看解释

原文跟读

The United States Supreme Court on Monday ended a 26-year ban on betting on professional and college sports.
周一,美国最高法院终止了长达26年的对职业和大学体育的博彩禁令。
The court’s decision permits state officials to pass laws permitting books to open on sports such as football, basketball, baseball and other games.
法院判定给予各州官员准许在诸如足球、篮球、棒球和其他运动项目上通过法律开放书籍的权利。
In the coming months, those officials will also consider where bets can be placed: casinos, horse racing tracks, betting centers, stadiums, online, or from mobile phones.
在接下来的几个月里,这些官员还将考虑可以从什么地方下注:赌场、赛马场、博彩中心、体育场、网上或手机上。
Supporters of the decision said legal betting could sharply increase income for states and the gambling industry.And they pointed out illegal sports betting is common.The American Gaming Association reported that Americans already place about $150 billion a year on bets.
支持者称体育博彩合法化的决议将会大幅增加各州以及博彩业的收入。他们指出非法体育博彩很常见。美国博彩委员会报道称:美国人每年在非法体育博彩活动中要投入约 1500 亿美元。
Opponents of the decision include major sports groups, such as the National Football League.Those groups said expanding legal gambling on sports could hurt the integrity of the games.In other words, they worry that players or others would try to influence the outcome of the games for financial gain.
对该项决议的反对方包括美国国家橄榄球联盟等大型体育组织。这些组织称扩大合法体育博彩将会损害到比赛的公正。换句话说,他们担心运动员或者其他人会为了经济收入试图干扰比赛结果。
The president of an organization that helps people addicted to gambling also expressed concern.Marlene Warner leads the National Council on Problem Gambling.She said the ruling “will likely increase gambling participation and gambling problems unless steps are taken to minimize harm.”
一个帮助赌博成瘾者的组织主席也对此表示担忧。全国赌博问题协会领导人玛琳·华纳表示:这项裁定“除非采取将损害降到最小化的措施,否则可能会增加参与赌博和赌博问题。”
But given Monday’s ruling, both the sports groups and the National Council on Problem Gambling have suggested that some of the income from legal betting go toward supporting their interests.
但是提及周一的这项裁定,体育组织和全国赌博问题协会都认为:合法博彩的部分收入会对他们有利。
Three Supreme Court justices also disagreed with the ruling.They said parts of the original law were worth keeping.
最高法院的3位法官对这项决议持反对票。他们说原有法律的部分内容是值得保留的。
But the majority of justices said the issue was not so much sports or betting, but states’ rights.They said states should not be forced to adopt a federal regulation system – an argument that may later be used in cases related to immigration laws and marijuana restrictions.
但是大部分法官认为问题并不在于体育或者体育博彩,而在于各州的权利。他们认为不应当强迫各州接受联邦监管体制——这一论证可能之后会用在与移民法和大麻管制有关的案例中。
I’m Kelly Jean Kelly.
凯利·吉恩·凯利报道。

点击加载更多

我的生词本