Former N.J. Gov. Chris Christie discusses his legacy as the godfather of legal sports betting, prediction markets, and the Trumps
"I’m still waiting for the statue that they’re going to build of me, or the thank-you note."
Chris Christie has been a two-time Republican presidential candidate, the governor of New Jersey, and a U.S. attorney. But history might show that he generated the most enduring national impact in a different role, as the godfather of legalized sports betting.
In 2012, when he was still New Jersey’s governor, Christie signed a bill that would allow customers to wager on professional and collegiate sports at 12 casinos and four racetracks.
He correctly predicted that the bill — which directly challenged a longstanding federal law that restricted legal sports betting to just a handful of states — would lead to him being sued by powerful opponents, and that over the long haul, his efforts would succeed.
But in a recent interview with The Inquirer, Christie said that even he did not imagine that sports gambling would evolve from a location-based attraction to phone apps that are readily accessible and open for business around the clock. Americans spent a record $165 billion on sports wagers in 2025, amid growing concern from health experts and lawmakers that mobile gambling is driving a health epidemic.
Nor did Christie — who now works as a strategic adviser to the American Gaming Association — envision the rise of prediction markets, some of which have been accused in lawsuits across the U.S. of running illegal sports betting operations. Christie, however, said he is unsurprised that two prediction market companies count Donald Trump Jr. among their advisers.
The Inquirer is investigating how the rise of the multi-billion dollar sports gambling and prediction market industries are affecting public health and professional sports. Read more of our coverage:
· Bryce Harper addresses controversy over his video to FanDuel VIP bettor
· Congress demands FanDuel, MLB and players union make policy changes, citing Harper controversy
· MLBPA supports banning players from promoting sportsbook VIP programs
· As the betting industry grows, kids as young as 11 are getting hooked
· He wrote the book on sports gambling's rise. Here's what he thinks you should know.
Christie’s sports gambling crusade began just two months after New Jersey voters approved a referendum in November 2011 to legalize sports betting in the state.
Casino industry lobbyists had long championed the type of bill that he signed, predicting that sports betting would be a double win for the state, attracting new customers to struggling casinos and generating revenue to benefit elderly and disabled residents.
But a federal law, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, had since 1992 restricted legal sports betting to Delaware, Montana, Nevada, and Oregon. Christie wasn’t deterred.
“Am I expecting there may be legal action taken against us to try to prevent it? Yes,” he told reporters in 2012. “But I have every confidence we’re going to be successful.”
Then the National Collegiate Athletic Association — along with Major League Baseball, the NFL, the NBA, and the NHL — sued Christie for violating the federal law, igniting a legal saga that would wind for years through district and circuit courts before reaching the U.S. Supreme Court in 2017.
Christie argued that PASPA had been a constitutional overreach that violated the Tenth Amendment’s “anti-commandeering” doctrine.
“We lost the first six times [in lower courts],” Christie said. “I had the sense that maybe I was wrong.”
In 2018, the Supreme Court voted to overturn PASPA, giving states the freedom to enact their own sports betting laws.
This interview with Christie, 63, has been edited and condensed for clarity.
Why was legalizing sports betting in 2012 a priority for you?
I was trying to differentiate Atlantic City, and give the casinos something new and different to offer, and to help preserve the horse racing business. I saw it at the time as an offensive and defensive measure. That was the motivation.
The leaders of professional sports leagues were critical of your efforts, and deeply opposed to legalizing sports gambling. What did you think of their position?
I thought that their opposition was both wrongheaded and hypocritical, and I told them so. [Then-NBA commissioner] David Stern was probably the most vehement against it, but [NFL Commissioner] Roger Goodell was a driving force, too. I told them, ‘[Sports betting] is happening anyway. You’d rather have people bet with illegal bookies — either mob-related, or offshore — than companies who are in the business and regulated by the state?’ It made no sense.
Were you surprised to see those leagues later enter into lucrative partnerships with sportsbook companies?
I wasn’t surprised at all. The leagues have shown an extraordinary ability to chase a dollar. I’m still waiting for the statue that they’re going to build of me, or the thank-you note. [Legalizing sports betting] has helped their TV contracts as well. People who weren’t even necessarily interested in sports before are now extraordinarily interested because they have a little bit of a wager on it. It’s kind of amazing.
In the years since the Supreme Court overturned PASPA, NBA and MLB players have been arrested for conspiring with gamblers. An NFL executive was recently suspended for sharing inside information about the team’s draft plans.
It’s inevitable that was going to happen. But I think because there is such a great deal of transparency, the leagues can act quickly. That makes it much more different from when gambling was illegal, and you still had some athletes or people associated with sports interacting with [bettors]. The regulation brings about transparency, and transparency makes it easier to police.
Sports betting has evolved into a 24/7 mobile enterprise. Do you consider it to be a different product than what it was in 2012?
Completely. I don’t think I could ever have anticipated that it would be in everybody’s pocket. That’s a little bit disturbing to me, to tell you the truth, the proliferation of it. And obviously prediction markets have been very disturbing to me, particularly because they market to teenagers, which is strictly prohibited for the legal gaming companies.
Prediction markets have also faced backlash for allowing people to wager on U.S. military operations and the deaths of foreign leaders.
I think the whole thing is absurd, and not good for the public.
President Trump’s son, President Donald Trump Jr., is an adviser to Kalshi and has shares of the company, and his venture capital firm has invested in Polymarket. Those companies are regulated by the federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Does that seem like a conflict to you?
I think common sense gives you the answer to that. If it’s a money-making enterprise for the Trump family, then the odds are it’s going to face light regulatory action.
Some state attorneys general have sued Kalshi. They allege that the company is running an unlicensed, illegal sports betting operation. Kalshi insists it is a commodity exchange. Will this end up being decided by the Supreme Court?
It’s betting. It’s not an investment. It’s not a commodity. The Supreme Court has ruled that states have the right to regulate sports betting. I think that it’s going to go to the Supreme Court, and I’m confident [the prediction markets] will lose.
We’ve interviewed addiction experts who say that sports gambling addiction is now a health epidemic, similar to tobacco and opioid abuse.
I always thought that a big portion of this [revenue] has to go toward addiction treatment, and I think that’s got to continue.
Elected officials in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and other states are exploring new regulations for sportsbook operators, like curtailing or eliminating in-game microbets or VIP programs. Are those kinds of reforms needed?
As long as [sports betting] is a venture that creates tax revenue, then the states are always going to be examining this issue. They’re partners. They can’t claim no responsibility. I don’t know how it’ll manifest, or where it’ll land. … I think all regulation should be rooted in evidence-based research. So if there are changes that we see that could help make [gambling] safer, they should be considered.
The Inquirer will continue to report on issues related to the growth of gambling addiction — among teens and adults — across Pennsylvania. If you or someone you know wants to speak with a reporter, please contact David Gambacorta or William Bender at dgambacorta@inquirer.com and wbender@inquirer.com
The Inquirer’s journalism is supported, in part, by the Lenfest Institute for Journalism and readers like you. News and editorial content are created independently of The Inquirer’s donors. Gifts to support The Inquirer’s high-impact journalism can be made at inquirer.com/donate. A list of Lenfest Institute donors can be found at lenfestinstitute.org/supporters.
