ILCS » Chapter 230 · Act 10
Illinois Compiled Statutes

230 ILCS 10/2 (2026)

Legislative intent

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(230 ILCS 10/2) (from Ch. 120, par. 2402)
    Sec. 2. Legislative intent.
    (a) This Act is intended to benefit the people of the State of Illinois by assisting economic development, promoting Illinois tourism, and increasing the amount of revenues available to the State to assist and support education, and to defray State expenses.
    (b) While authorization of riverboat and casino gambling will enhance investment, beautification, development and tourism in Illinois, it is recognized that it will do so successfully only if public confidence and trust in the credibility and integrity of the gambling operations and the regulatory process is maintained. Therefore, regulatory provisions of this Act are designed to strictly regulate the facilities, persons, associations and practices related to gambling operations pursuant to the police powers of the State, including comprehensive law enforcement supervision.
    (c) The Illinois Gaming Board established under this Act should, as soon as possible, inform each applicant for an owners license of the Board's intent to grant or deny a license.
(Source: P.A. 101-31, eff. 6-28-19.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1994–2025 · leading case: Crusius v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 837 N.E.2d 88 (Ill. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Crusius v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 837 N.E.2d 88 (Ill. 2005). · cites it 7× “See 230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 2004). Emerald, they point out, was the only licensee whose operations were dormant when the General Assembly enacted section 11.”
Emerald Casino, Inc. v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 803 N.E.2d 914 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 6× “" 230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 1998). If the legislature intended "shall" to mean "may", nothing much, if anything, would have been accomplished by the amendment.”
Emerald Casino, Inc. v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 851 N.E.2d 843 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 2× “3d at 33 , quoting 230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 1998). And we said: “We believe that when the legislature chose to enact a statute that applied only to Emerald it thought it was providing a remedy for a moribund license, not creating yet another round of delay and rejection.”
Nehmelman v. Penn Nat'l Gaming, Inc., 790 F. Supp. 2d 787 (N.D. Ill. 2011). “27, at 11) (quoting 230 ILCS 10/2, 10/6). In support of this position, Defendants cite Polansky v.”
Crusius Ex Rel. Taxpayers of the State of Illinois v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 807 N.E.2d 1207 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “" 230 ILCS 10/2 (West 2000). The record indicates that on July 9, 1992, the Board issued one of the first set of licenses to Emerald's corporate predecessor to operate a riverboat casino at a home dock on the Mississippi River in East Dubuque, Illinois.”
Midwest Gaming & Ent., LLC v. The Cnty. of Cook, 2015 IL App (1st) 142786 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “” 230 ILCS 10/2(b) (West 2012). ¶ 52 The Riverboat Gambling Act established the Gaming Board, which had “the powers and duties specified in this Act, and all other powers necessary and proper to fully and effectively execute this Act for the purpose of administering, regulating,…”
Crusius v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 348 Ill. App. 3d 44 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “” 230 ILCS 10/2 (West 2000). The record indicates that on July 9, 1992, the Board issued one of the first set of licenses to Emerald’s corporate predecessor to operate a riverboat casino at a home dock on the Mississippi River in East Dubuque, Illinois.”
Windy City Promotions, LLC v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 2017 IL App (3d) 150434 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). · cites it 2× “” 230 ILCS 10/2 (West 2014). To effectuate these goals, the Riverboat Gambling Act created the Gaming Board, “which shall have the powers and duties specified in this Act, and all other powers necessary and proper to fully and effectively execute this Act for the purpose of…”
J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc., 2015 IL App (5th) 140092 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). · cites it 2× “230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 2012). This intent can be accomplished, the statute continues, "only if public confidence and trust in the credibility and integrity of the gambling operations and the regulatory process is maintained.”
J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc., 2015 IL App (5th) 140092 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 2012). This intent can be accomplished, the statute continues, “only if public confidence and trust in the credibility and integrity of the gambling operations and the regulatory process is maintained.”
Illinois Gaming Mach. Operators Ass'n v. City of Waukegan, 2025 IL App (2d) 230431 (Ill. App. Ct. 2025). “230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 2022). ¶ 10 Effective December 17, 2021, the Act provides that a home rule municipality may not impose any type of tax on terminal operators, VGTs, or users or players of VGTs.”
Crusius v. Illinois Gaming Bd. (Ill. 2005). · cites it 7× “See 230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 2004). Emerald, they point out, was the only licensee whose operations were dormant when the General Assembly enacted section 11.”
Show all 19 citing cases →
— 230 ILCS 10/2(a) — 9 cases
Emerald Casino, Inc. v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 803 N.E.2d 914 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “" 230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 1998). If the legislature intended "shall" to mean "may", nothing much, if anything, would have been accomplished by the amendment.”
Crusius v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 837 N.E.2d 88 (Ill. 2005). “See 230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 2004). Emerald, they point out, was the only licensee whose operations were dormant when the General Assembly enacted section 11.”
Emerald Casino, Inc. v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 851 N.E.2d 843 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). “3d at 33 , quoting 230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 1998). And we said: “We believe that when the legislature chose to enact a statute that applied only to Emerald it thought it was providing a remedy for a moribund license, not creating yet another round of delay and rejection.”
J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc., 2015 IL App (5th) 140092 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 2012). This intent can be accomplished, the statute continues, “only if public confidence and trust in the credibility and integrity of the gambling operations and the regulatory process is maintained.”
Illinois Gaming Mach. Operators Ass'n v. City of Waukegan, 2025 IL App (2d) 230431 (Ill. App. Ct. 2025). “230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 2022). ¶ 10 Effective December 17, 2021, the Act provides that a home rule municipality may not impose any type of tax on terminal operators, VGTs, or users or players of VGTs.”
— 230 ILCS 10/2(b) — 10 cases
Crusius v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 837 N.E.2d 88 (Ill. 2005). “See 230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 2004). Emerald, they point out, was the only licensee whose operations were dormant when the General Assembly enacted section 11.”
Emerald Casino, Inc. v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 803 N.E.2d 914 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “" 230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 1998). If the legislature intended "shall" to mean "may", nothing much, if anything, would have been accomplished by the amendment.”
Midwest Gaming & Ent., LLC v. The Cnty. of Cook, 2015 IL App (1st) 142786 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “” 230 ILCS 10/2(b) (West 2012). ¶ 52 The Riverboat Gambling Act established the Gaming Board, which had “the powers and duties specified in this Act, and all other powers necessary and proper to fully and effectively execute this Act for the purpose of administering, regulating,…”
Windy City Promotions, LLC v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 2017 IL App (3d) 150434 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). “” 230 ILCS 10/2 (West 2014). To effectuate these goals, the Riverboat Gambling Act created the Gaming Board, “which shall have the powers and duties specified in this Act, and all other powers necessary and proper to fully and effectively execute this Act for the purpose of…”
J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc., 2015 IL App (5th) 140092 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “230 ILCS 10/2(a) (West 2012). This intent can be accomplished, the statute continues, "only if public confidence and trust in the credibility and integrity of the gambling operations and the regulatory process is maintained.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.