Experts: NY campus geofence betting ban may fall short

State Senator Andrew Gounardes sponsored bill SB10470 to prohibit mobile sports wagering on any college campus in New York and require campuses to provide geographic data and boundary information to the New York State Gaming Commission for geofencing enforcement. GeoComply is contracted to provide location services in the state.

A companion measure, A10526, stalled in the Assembly when the legislative session ended on June 5. Lawmakers must reintroduce either bill when the next session begins in January if they want to advance the proposal.

Douglas Mishkin, a partner at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner and a former senior executive at a gaming company, said geofencing can reduce on-campus wagering in some locations but will not eliminate it. He noted geofencing is effective on isolated or self-contained campuses, yet it becomes difficult to enforce where campuses are integrated with city blocks and public streets.

Brian Petrotta, an assistant professor who researches sports media and gambling, offered qualified support for limiting access on campus but questioned whether the bill would change student behavior. He pointed out the proposal does not cover daily fantasy sports or prediction markets, which typically allow participation by 18-year-olds.

Officials and technical vendors have raised enforcement concerns. Dense urban schools could present mapping challenges and trigger false blocks for the public, while smaller or city-integrated campuses may be easy for students to circumvent by moving a short distance off campus. A similar campus geofencing bill failed in Maryland in 2024 after university officials described geofencing as not technically feasible.

Critics also warned that a campus-only ban could push students toward offshore sportsbooks or other platforms outside state oversight. A University of Tennessee student told a campus newspaper that virtual private networks were used to bypass platform restrictions on campus and that the ban “hasn’t really affected me at all.” The Tennessee bill considered earlier this year would have applied only to public universities and would have banned wagering in college sports venues.

Mishkin recommended alternatives focused on user behavior rather than geographic limits. He proposed measures such as age-based limits on wager size or frequency, greater information sharing between operators and the gaming commission, and algorithmic monitoring to flag repeated or in-class wagering patterns. He acknowledged those options would face pushback from operators who would describe them as burdensome.

New York law already bars bets on in-state teams, which affects the scope of college sports wagering. Sponsors may revise SB10470 before reintroduction to add language covering daily fantasy sports and prediction markets, or to change the responsibilities placed on college administrations and platforms. The bill’s technical limits and administrative requirements are likely to shape further debate before the next legislative session.