Legal challenge to casino referendum language
Brooklyn attorney Eric Snyder has brought a legal challenge against the favorable wording of the casino amendment referendum on this fall's ballot.
The suit, which was filed against the state Board of Elections in the state Supreme Court in Albany County, argues that the BOE exceeded its authority when it included advocacy language in the referendum. A poll released yesterday revealed that the positive language swayed public favor in support of the cause.
A copy of Snyder's memorandum of law and his order to show cause are available below.
The referendum language, which has been criticized by good government groups says, "The proposed amendment to section 9 of article 1 of the Constitution would allow the Legislature to authorize up to seven casinos in New York State for the legislated purposes of promoting job growth, increasing aid to schools, and permitting local governments to lower property taxes through revenues generated. Shall the amendment be approved?"
Snyder argues in his court filing that as a taxpayer opposed to commercial gambling he has standing to raise his suit.
He also notes that despite the gambling amendment being the last of six amendments recently approved by the state Legislature, it was vaulted to the first spot on the ballot this election.
Follow @poozer87 on Twitter.