(Legal Newsline) – DraftKings, apparently in the crosshairs of officials at Philadelphia City Hall, is arguing in a recently filed complaint that a law granting the City the power to bring certain lawsuits is unenforceable.
At issue is Philadelphia’s own consumer-protection law, which largely mirrors the state’s but authorizes Mayor Cherelle Parker to bring her own cases. The Philadelphia Consumer Protection Ordinance was enacted in 2024 and has since been used in lawsuits against pharmacy benefits managers over opioids, S.C. Johnson & Son over the recyclability of Ziploc bags and the gun-maker Glock.
The latest target is DraftKings, which received a subpoena from the City in April seeking to learn how much money the company has made from gamblers identified through analytics and other means, plus information on promotions and bonus offers.
Most consumer-protection lawsuits in the state are brought under the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, but Mayor Parker signed the Philadelphia law because of the “absence of a specialized local mechanism within the mayor’s chain of command,” a press release read.
“The General Assembly vested public enforcement authority under the UTPCPL in the Attorney General and district attorneys acting in the name of the Commonwealth,” DraftKings’ complaint says.
“It did not authorize municipalities to create parallel consumer protection enforcement agencies.”
Ultimately, the Philadelphia law allows the mayor to bring consumer-protection cases without its district attorney, and the investigation into DraftKings’ business practices usurps the power of state gaming regulators, the company says.
Under the First Class City Home Rule Act, first-class cities can’t exercise powers “contrary to, or in limitation or enlargement of, powers granted by acts of the General Assembly” that apply statewide. The PCPO does just that, DraftKings says, in changing who may enforce the law and what penalties are imposed.
Michael Engle of Stradley Ronon Stevens and Young represents DraftKings, alone with attorneys from Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass in San Francisco.
The pharmacy benefits managers sued by Philadelphia have similarly challenged the PCPO in that case, stating it “irreconcilably conflicts and interferes with the UTPCPL’s enforcement scheme.” In response, the City said municipalities have the power of self-government.
“(T)he CPO provides a complementary, additional means to further the purpose of the UTPCPL within Philadelphia,” lawyers wrote for Philadelphia. Their arguments remain pending before Judge Gerald Pappert.
