On April 13, 2007, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reminded Philadelphia that they could not put a question on the May election that could stop the power of the state regulators to provide slots casinos with licenses until the justices can review the state’s challenge against the planned referendum.
The Supreme Court ordered a quick deadline for the submission of the written statements regarding the case and the dissensions of the case’s 2 justices. Meanwhile, they gave a preliminary restraining order to prevent placing the slots question on the May 15, 2007 ballot. The court’s decision about the problem could resolve whether Philadelphia will be considered the biggest city with casinos.
The statements will be available on April 27, 2007. The two casinos, the SugarHouse Casino and the Foxwoods Casino in Philadelphia, which have been recognized by the Pennsylvania Gaming Board in December to be built on the Philadelphia riverfront have been placed in a precarious position. However, last month, the city council approved a ballot referendum proposed by the losing slots license applicants and opponents.
If approved, it will totally affect the plans of the SugarHouse and Foxwoods Casino. Justice Thomas G. Saylor filed a dissent against the temporary injunction regarding the May 15th ballot, saying that the court of appeals does not have any power to decide on a matter like a referendum. A spokesman for the Casino-Free Philadelphia, which has originally called for Daniel Hunter, said that the temporary injunction is a ridiculous idea.