18 U.S.C. § 1301

Importing or transporting lottery tickets

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

Whoever brings into the United States for the purpose of disposing of the same, or knowingly deposits with any express company or other common carrier for carriage, or carries in interstate or foreign commerce any paper, certificate, or instrument purporting to be or to represent a ticket, chance, share, or interest in or dependent upon the event of a lottery, gift enterprise, or similar scheme, offering prizes dependent in whole or in part upon lot or chance, or any advertisement of, or list of the prizes drawn or awarded by means of, any such lottery, gift enterprise, or similar scheme; or, being engaged in the business of procuring for a person in 1 State such a ticket, chance, share, or interest in a lottery, gift,11 So in original. The comma probably should not appear. enterprise or similar scheme conducted by another State (unless that business is permitted under an agreement between the States in question or appropriate authorities of those States), knowingly transmits in interstate or foreign commerce information to be used for the purpose of procuring such a ticket, chance, share, or interest; or knowingly takes or receives any such paper, certificate, instrument, advertisement, or list so brought, deposited, or transported, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 40 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1950–2025 · leading case: United States v. Edge Broad. Co., 509 U.S. 418 (1993).
United States v. Edge Broad. Co., 509 U.S. 418 (1993). · cites it 4× “963 , 18 U. S. C. § 1301 , which outlawed the transportation of lottery tickets in interstate or foreign commerce.”
McElroy v. United States, 455 U.S. 642 (1982). · cites it 2× “§ 1231 (strikebreaking); 18 U. S. C. § 1301 (lotteries); 18 U. S. C.”
United States v. Nathan Wall (95-5007) & Donald Wall (95-5008), 92 F.3d 1444 (6th Cir. 1996). · cites it 2× “) (upholding Interstate Wagering Amendment, 18 U.S.C. § 1301 , which prohibits the transmission in interstate commerce of information to be used for the purpose of procuring a lottery ticket), cert.”
Millan Couvertier v. Gil Bonar, 173 F.3d 450 (1st Cir. 1999). · cites it 4× “” Third, we reject the notion that there is no valid basis for the Customs Service to confiscate prized tickets because 18 U.S.C. § 1301 does not criminalize the interstate transportation of drawn lottery tickets.”
Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Ass'n v. Governor of New Jersey, 730 F.3d 208 (3rd Cir. 2013). “§ 1084 , and proscribed interstate transportation of means for carrying out sports lotteries, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1301 ,1307(d). 17 Appellants contend that Congress has not preempted state law but instead incorporated it to the extent certain prohibitions are tied to whatever is legal…”
United States v. Fourteen Thousand Eight Hundred & Seventy-Six Pieces of Puerto Rico Lottery Tickets, 791 F. Supp. 345 (D.P.R. 1992). · cites it 9× “§§ 1301 and 1302, 3 refer to paper or tickets dependent upon the future event of a lottery; (ii) that the essential elements of a “lottery” are consideration, prize, and *347 chance, 4 and (iii) that under Puerto Rico law prized lottery tickets are considered documents of value…”
United States v. Michael J. Stuebben, 799 F.2d 225 (5th Cir. 1986). · cites it 4× “GEE, Circuit Judge: Appellant Stuebben was tried for transporting lottery paraphernalia in interstate commerce in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1301 and 18 U.S.C. § 1953 . Convicted on all counts, he now appeals, advancing two arguments, one statutory and the other constitutional.”
Wirtz v. Quinn, 2011 IL 111903 (Ill. 2011). “18 U.S.C. §§ 1301 through 1304 , 1953 (a) (2000).”
Wirtz v. Quinn, 953 N.E.2d 899 (Ill. 2011). “18 U.S.C. §§ 1301 through 1304, 1953(a) (2000).”
Tichenor v. Missouri State Lottery Comm'n, 742 S.W.2d 170 (Mo. 1988). · cites it 2× “See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1301 , 1307(b); 18 U.S.C. § 1953 .”
United States v. Norberto, 373 F. Supp. 2d 150 (E.D.N.Y 2005). · cites it 6× “Count One of the Indictment alleges a conspiracy to transport and mail lottery materials in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1301 , 1302, 1952(a)(3), and 1953(a); Count Two alleges a money laundering conspiracy in violation of 18 U.”
Murray v. Sevier, 50 F. Supp. 2d 1257 (M.D. Ala. 1999). · cites it 3× “Plaintiff admits that Defendant Scott organized said tournaments, but argues that "because they were 'for-profit' they were unlawful under 18 U.S.C. § 1301 et seq." (Pl.’s Resp. to Def.”
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.