U.S. Code » Title 15 » Chapter CHAPTER 24— TRANSPORTATION OF GAMBLING DEVICES

15 U.S.C. § 1171

Definitions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar
As used in this chapter—(a) The term “gambling device” means—(1) any so-called “slot machine” or any other machine or mechanical device an essential part of which is a drum or reel with insignia thereon, and (A) which when operated may deliver, as the result of the application of an element of chance, any money or property, or (B) by the operation of which a person may become entitled to receive, as the result of the application of an element of chance, any money or property; or(2) any other machine or mechanical device (including, but not limited to, roulette wheels and similar devices) designed and manufactured primarily for use in connection with gambling, and (A) which when operated may deliver, as the result of the application of an element of chance, any money or property, or (B) by the operation of which a person may become entitled to receive, as the result of the application of an element of chance, any money or property; or(3) any subassembly or essential part intended to be used in connection with any such machine or mechanical device, but which is not attached to any such machine or mechanical device as a constituent part.(b) The term “State” includes the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam.(c) The term “possession of the United States” means any possession of the United States which is not named in paragraph 11 So in original. Probably should be “subsection”. (b) of this section.(d) The term “interstate or foreign commerce” means commerce (1) between any State or possession of the United States and any place outside of such State or possession, or (2) between points in the same State or possession of the United States but through any place outside thereof.(e) The term “intrastate commerce” means commerce wholly within one State or possession of the United States.(f) The term “boundaries” has the same meaning given that term in section 1301 of title 43.(Jan. 2, 1951, ch. 1194, § 1, 64 Stat. 1134; Pub. L. 87–840, §§ 2, 3, Oct. 18, 1962, 76 Stat. 1075; Pub. L. 102–251, title II, § 202(c), Mar. 9, 1992, 106 Stat. 62.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1992—Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 102–251 added subsec. (f).

1962—Subsec. (a)(2), (3). Pub. L. 87–840, § 2, substituted provisions including machines and mechanical devices designed and manufactured primarily for gambling by the operation of which a person may become entitled to receive, as the result of chance, any money or property, for provisions which included machines or mechanical devices designed and manufactured to operate by inserting a coin, token, or similar object, in par. (2), and inserted “, but which is not attached to any such machine or mechanical device as a constituent part”, in par. (3).

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 87–840, § 3, substituted “the District of Columbia” for “Alaska, Hawaii”.

Subsecs. (d), (e). Pub. L. 87–840, § 3, added subsecs. (d) and (e).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1962 Amendment

Pub. L. 87–840, § 7, Oct. 18, 1962, 76 Stat. 1077, provided that: “The amendments made by this Act [enacting section 1178 of this title and amending this section and sections 1172 and 1173 of this title] shall take effect on the sixtieth day after the date of its enactment [Oct. 18, 1962].”

Short Title of 1962 Amendment

Pub. L. 87–840, § 1, Oct. 18, 1962, 76 Stat. 1075, provided: “That this Act [enacting section 1178 of this title and amending this section and sections 1172 and 1173 of this title] may be cited as the ‘Gambling Devices Act of 1962’.”

Short Title

Act Jan. 2, 1951, which enacted this chapter and a note set out under this section, is popularly known as the “Gambling Devices Transportation Act”.

Separability

Act Jan. 2, 1951, ch. 1194, § 8, 64 Stat. 1136, provided that: “If any provision of this Act [this chapter] or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the Act [this chapter] which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Act [this chapter] are declared to be severable.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 87 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1952–2023 · leading case: United States v. One Hundred Thirty-Seven (137) Draw Poker-Type MacHines & Six (6) Slot MacHines, 606 F. Supp. 747 (N.D. Ohio 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. One Hundred Thirty-Seven (137) Draw Poker-Type MacHines & Six (6) Slot MacHines, 606 F. Supp. 747 (N.D. Ohio 1984). · cites it 16× “The government contends that these machines are gambling devices as defined in 15 U.S.C. § 1171 and subject to forfeiture to the United States under 15 U.”
United States v. 162 MegaMania Gambling Devices, 231 F.3d 713 (10th Cir. 2000). · cites it 4× “The government asserted the machines operating the game “MegaMania” are unlawful gambling devices operated in violation of the Johnson Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1171— 1178. 1 A district judge subsequently issued a warrant to seize the MegaMania machines.”
United States v. Various Slot MacHines on Guam, & Amanda Guzman Shelton, Claimant-Appellant, 658 F.2d 697 (9th Cir. 1981). · cites it 3× “DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge: Appeal from a judgment forfeiting 9 machines alleged to be gambling machines as defined in 15 U.S.C. § 1171 (a)(1) and (2) and subject to forfeiture under 15 U.”
State Ex Rel. Stephan v. Finney, 867 P.2d 1034 (Kan. 1994). · cites it 4× “Since the admission of Kansas to the Union in 1861, the Kansas Constitution has provided that "[l]otteries and the sale of lottery tickets are forever prohibited.”
United States v. 294 Various Gambling Devices, 718 F. Supp. 1236 (W.D. Pa. 1989). · cites it 5× “instituted this civil forfeiture action against a variety of video draw poker machines, alleging that they are gambling devices prohibited by 15 U.S.C. § 1171 et seq. The machines were seized by agents of the FBI from various bars, restaurants and clubs throughout Erie County,…”
United States v. Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska, a Federally Recognized Indian Tribe, 324 F.3d 607 (8th Cir. 2003). · cites it 6× “The government, however, contends that the Lucky Tab II is a class III device, or, in the alternative, that even if it is a class II device, it is prohibited by the Johnson Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1171 et seq. At trial, the following evidence was adduced regarding the Lucky Tab II…”
Brizill v. Dist. of Columbia Bd. of Elections & Ethics, 911 A.2d 1212 (D.C. 2006). · cites it 5× “1134 (1951) (current version at 15 U.S.C. §§ 1171— 1178). The stated purpose of the Johnson Act is “to prohibit transportation of gambling devices in interstate and foreign commerce.”
Page v. McCuen, 884 S.W.2d 951 (Ark. 1994). · cites it 2× “Without the provision there would be no exemption from the Johnson Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1171 & 1172 (1988 & Supp.1993).”
United States v. One Elec. Pointmaker, 149 F. Supp. 427 (N.D. Ind. 1957). · cites it 9× “The cause was tried to the court on the sole issue as to whether the machine is a gambling device within the meaning of 15 U.S.C.A. § 1171 , and it is the cause on the merits which now solicits the decision of this court.”
Diamond Game Enter., Inc. v. Reno, 9 F. Supp. 2d 13 (D.D.C. 1998). · cites it 4× “15 U.S.C. §§ 1171 et seq. The 1962 Gambling Devices Act was not an independent piece of legislation; rather Congress promulgated it as an amendment revising the Johnson Act.”
United States v. Robert J. Ansani, Harvey Milner, John Edward Moore, Joseph J. Aiuppa & Ray Johnson, 240 F.2d 216 (7th Cir. 1957). · cites it 3× “, certain “trade boosters,” are gambling devices as defined in 15 U.S.C.A. § 1171 (a) (3). The trade booster is an electrically operated device.”
Cabazon Band of Mission Indians v. Nat'l Indian Gaming Comm'n, 827 F. Supp. 26 (D.D.C. 1993). · cites it 3× “” 13 The adopted definition of “gambling device” is taken from the Johnson Act, 14 15 U.S.C. § 1171 et seq. This definition is the only definition possible in order to implement Congress’ explicit intent, as expressed in IGRA.”
Show all 87 citing cases →
— 15 U.S.C. § 1171(a) — 2 cases
United States v. Three (3) Trade Boosters, 135 F. Supp. 24 (M.D. Penn. 1955).
United States v. H. M. Branson Distrib. Co., 398 F.2d 929 (6th Cir. 1968).
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.