Athletes Went to Court, Now State Wants Iowa Sports Betting Scandal to End

Athletes Went to Court, Now State Wants Iowa Sports Betting Scandal to End

The 2023 Iowa sports betting scandal has turned the hunters into the hunted in a federal courtroom.

Now, it’s the 26 past and present college athletes who want the court process to continue. They argue that their civil rights were violated when investigators secretly pinpointed their betting activity from Iowa State and Iowa dorm rooms.

The Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation (DCI) used sports betting location technology and IP addresses to identify the students. The list of NCAA-sanctioned athletes ranged from:

  • Iowa State’s returning starting quarterback to
  • Hawkeye wrestling All-Americans.

Many of the students missed the 2023 season and couldn’t regain their eligibility under NCAA guidelines.

The Iowa Attorney General’s office on Friday asked the court to dismiss a civil lawsuit tied to the unprecedented sting operation.

Public Ridicule and Emotional Distress

Athletes involved in the Iowa sports betting scandal are suing the DCI for accessing data on their phones without search warrants.

The athletes’ 47-page lawsuit suggests DCI actions led to indictments and convictions while “severely upending their lives, collegiate careers, and future opportunities.”

They want compensation for “humiliation, degradation, public ridicule, loss of personal reputation, and emotional distress.”

Des Moines attorney Van Plumb represents the athletes. His court filings suggest DCI Special Agent Brian Sanger used the AI program Kibana and expertise from GeoComply to create a GeoFence around dorms in Ames and Iowa City.

Companies typically use GeoFences to establish and enforce legal betting regions. For example, they prevent a bettor located in Missouri from accessing a sportsbook licensed in Iowa. They can also detect the location of a sports betting app and an IP address in real-time.

Plumb told the court the DCI conducted its digital search “without a warrant, tips, complaints, or evidence that illegal gambling was occurring.”

State’s Argument for a Dismissal

The Iowa Attorney General’s Office argues that the students “had no reasonable expectation of privacy” when they were using another person’s online wagering profile.

The state also argues that data location searches are a new area of case law. Digital boundaries are too recent to serve as a test of the Fourth Amendment, which protects citizens from illegal searches.

The Iowa Department of Public Safety cited a series of Iowa Codes and Administrative Rules in a Jan. 31 statement defending its sting operation. It notes that sportsbooks have to be transparent with customers about data sharing. Therefore, the athletes knew — or should have known — that their betting activity could be monitored by a third party.

State law obligates operators to “employ reasonable steps to prohibit coaches, athletic trainers, officials, players, or other individuals who participate in an authorized sporting event” from placing bets on the event.

“The Department traditionally does not comment on active investigations or litigation in an effort to ensure these matters are appropriately addressed by our justice system rather than the media. We believe the evidence was obtained in a constitutionally permissible manner. Ultimately it is up to the courts to decide.”

Lessons From the Iowa Sports Betting Scandal

The Iowa sports betting scandal drew NCAA policy changes. New rules reflect the growth of sports betting and its appeal to young adults.

Athletes who place bets or share insider information involving their own team permanently lose their eligibility. The NCAA eased other sanctions, however. Using an Iowa football player as an example:

  • If he bet on a University of Iowa game in another sport, he would now face a one-year penalty instead of a lifetime ban.
  • The college football player loses 50% of his season if he bets on any college football game.
  • NCAA reinstatement committee members base the remaining sanctions on cumulative sports betting amounts.
    • If the Iowa football player risked less than $200 — on NBA games and the World Series, for example — he’d receive “rules and prevention education.”
    • $201 to $500 — 10% of the season
    • $501 to $800 — 20% of the season
    • $800+ — 30% of the season, with discretion to up the penalty under extreme circumstances.

Iowa State and Iowa supporters and coaches still bristle at the gambling crackdown because their rivals in other states didn’t get the same scrutiny.

“I guess it’s our bad luck because, as far as I understand, it’s a state thing,” Iowa football coach Kirk Ferentz said at a media availability during the 2023 season. “Why those two universities — only — were targeted? There are college students at all kinds of universities. Sounds like it’s only athletes; that’s just my impression.”

About the Author
Russ Mitchell

Russ Mitchell

Lead Writer
Russ Mitchell joined Gaming Today as a lead writer in February 2023 after joining Catena Media in 2021 as a managing editor for the PlayIA and PlayVA brands. He covers sports betting industry, market developments, the college sports betting industry, and the four major North American pro sports leagues. He brings 25+ years of journalism experience to Gaming Today. He is a five-time winner of the Iowa’s prestigious Harrison “Skip” Weber Investigative Reporting award, a two-time National Newspaper Association award winner and a 50-time Iowa Newspaper Association award winner.

Get connected with us on Social Media