Sports Gambling Addiction Crisis Fueled By Sportsbook App Lobbying Efforts: Report

Report shows how gambling industry lobbied against consumer protections designed to reduce the risk of sports betting addictions, while aggressively promoting sportsbook apps to young men and college students.

Following the rapid expansion of legalized sports betting across the United States, a new watchdog report reveals how major gambling companies have systematically fought against basic consumer protections, even as gambling addiction rates among young adults have reached alarming levels.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2018 decision in Murphy v. NCAA paved the way for legalized sports betting, wagers have surged from $4.9 billion in 2017 to more than $148 billion in 2023. With sportsbooks now operating legally in 39 states and Washington, D.C., these figures are expected to climb even higher in the coming years, further embedding sports gambling into American culture.

Public health officials have repeatedly warned that the industry’s unchecked growth is fueling a surge in gambling-related harms, particularly among college students and young adults. Recent studies show that 1 in 10 young men now report signs of gambling addiction, and individuals with gambling disorders face a suicide risk up to 15 times higher than the general population.

Yet behind this dangerous expansion, the Campaign for Accountability (CfA), released a report titled The Online Gambling Industry’s Two-Faced Effort to Kill Consumer Protections on April 15, exposing how companies like DraftKings, FanDuel, Caesars and others publicly promote “responsible gambling” initiatives, while simultaneously lobbying aggressively to block, weaken, or delay regulations aimed at curbing addiction.

The Campaign for Accountability’s report highlights a consistent pattern among these service providers: deny risks, delay reforms, weaken safeguards, and prioritize profit.

As these troubling patterns come into sharper focus, sports betting addiction lawsuits are now being filed against companies like DraftKings, FanDuel, BetMGM and Caesars, alleging that they deliberately designed their apps to foster compulsive gambling habits. The claims accuse these platforms of using deceptive marketing tactics, addictive app features, and targeted promotions to exploit young adults and students, leading to devastating financial losses and emotional distress.

Sports betting addiction lawyers are now investigating claims nationwide for individuals between the ages of 18 and 30 who used platforms like FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM, Caesars, ESPN Bet, Fanatics or Bet365, and developed either a gambling addiction or incurred $10,000 or more in sports gambling losses or debt.

In the wake of the Murphy decision, gambling companies have aggressively lobbied state regulators, and continue to do so, to minimize restrictions on advertising and promotional practices.

Lobbying To Weaken Advertising and Promotion Safeguards

In one of the first of many coordinated lobbying efforts, the CfA report details how DraftKings successfully pressured Arizona regulators to weaken proposed rules that would have banned the use of the word “free” in promotions requiring users to make a deposit.

Rather than enforcing truthful advertising standards, Arizona regulators adopted industry-friendly language, allowing sportsbooks to continue promoting so-called “risk-free bets” that, in reality, exposed users to significant financial loss. This deceptive framing is critical to understanding how gambling apps foster addiction: by labeling promotions as “free” or “no-sweat,” platforms mask the fact that real money must be wagered—and often lost—before any rewards are unlocked.

Psychologically, this tactic exploits a cognitive bias known as the illusion of safety, encouraging users to place larger, riskier bets under the false belief that they are protected. For college students and young adults, who may have limited financial literacy, these offers can create a powerful sense of false security, pulling them deeper into cycles of repeated deposits, mounting debt and emotional distress.

Early victories like this in Arizona set a powerful precedent nationwide. By prioritizing aggressive, misleading marketing tactics over transparent consumer protections, gambling companies established the playbook they would continue to use: distort risk, blur financial consequences, and encourage compulsive betting behavior—all while presenting their platforms as safe and entertaining.

Betting Apps Push Back Against Limits on Addictive Features

As concerns over compulsive gambling mounted, some states moved to introduce safeguards targeting the riskiest features of online sports betting apps. However, the gambling industry responded with aggressive lobbying campaigns designed to block or weaken these reforms at every turn.

In Minnesota, the Sports Betting Alliance, which represents companies like DraftKings and FanDuel led efforts to defeat a proposed ban on in-game betting, which allows users to place rapid, impulsive wagers while a sporting event is underway. Public health experts have warned that in-game betting is uniquely addictive because it capitalizes on heightened emotional states and the illusion of quick wins. Despite these warnings, the industry successfully killed the amendment, preserving one of the most profitable, and dangerous forms of wagering.

Meanwhile, in Virginia, Caesars and DraftKings pushed back against proposed regulations that would have required apps to feature “cooling-off” prompts, encouraging players to take periodic breaks and reflect on their betting habits. The goal was to interrupt compulsive behavior loops intentionally designed into the apps, similar to those used in mobile gaming and social media. Yet under industry pressure, Virginia regulators ultimately dropped the proposal, as outlined in the Campaign for Accountability report.

In Vermont, regulators attempted to impose caps on promotional bonuses, a critical move aimed at limiting the financial bait used to lure users into deeper cycles of betting. Gambling companies like Caesars and FanDuel fought the rule, arguing that restrictions would make them less competitive. However, Vermont regulators ultimately adopted bonus caps, marking a rare victory for consumer protection advocates amid a nationwide pattern of industry dominance.

Each time meaningful reforms were proposed, the gambling industry deployed familiar rhetoric: claiming that restrictions would “hurt responsible bettors” and “push users toward illegal markets.” This strategy—deflect, delay, and deny—mirrors tactics used historically by the tobacco and opioid industries, where profits depended on maximizing addiction risk while downplaying public health concerns.

Sportsbooks Opposed Consumer Data Safeguards and College Ad Restrictions

In the latest wave of legislative battles, the gambling industry has increasingly focused on maintaining unrestricted access to consumer data and marketing channels, particularly targeting young users.

DraftKings, FanDuel, Caesars and others opposed Massachusetts regulations that prohibited the use of sensitive personal information, such as income level, debt or government benefits status, to target gambling promotions. DraftKings specifically argued that such limits would “hamper marketing practices,” despite evidence that financial vulnerability makes individuals more susceptible to gambling addiction.

In New York, FanDuel challenged new rules limiting gambling advertisements near college campuses and requiring sportsbooks to take responsibility for the actions of their marketing affiliates. Fortunately, the New York Gaming Commission upheld the restrictions, citing concerns about the normalization of gambling among students.

DraftKings also fought back in Maryland against regulations banning the promotion of “no-risk” bets, claiming the term was “confusing,” even though such language is widely criticized for misleading consumers about real financial risk. Nevertheless, Maryland regulators maintained the advertising restrictions.

Across these battles, one theme persisted: the industry consistently prioritized the ability to target high-risk, vulnerable users, even in the face of public health warnings.

DraftKings and FanDuel Lobby To Lower the Gambling Age and Target Younger Users

While aggressively marketing sportsbooks and online gambling platforms, companies like DraftKings and FanDuel have simultaneously worked for years to lower the minimum age for gambling-style products, despite overwhelming evidence that early exposure to gambling increases the risk of addiction later in life.

According to the Campaign for Accountability, even before the Supreme Court’s Murphy decision legalized widespread sports betting, DraftKings’ CEO admitted that daily fantasy sports (DFS) contests were “almost identical to a casino.” Yet, gambling operators have consistently tried to position DFS as a non-gambling product, lobbying lawmakers to allow individuals as young as 18 to participate.

This effort directly contradicts warnings from the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG), which has strongly recommended that all forms of gambling, including DFS, carry a minimum age of 21. Research has repeatedly shown that the younger individuals are when they start gambling, the more likely they are to develop compulsive gambling problems as adults.

Despite this, the industry lobbied to reduce safeguards:

• Florida: The Sports Betting Alliance (representing FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM and Fanatics) opposed a 2023 bill that would have set the minimum DFS age at 21. Lobbyists argued that “hundreds of thousands” of individuals under 21 were already participating legally and “having a good time.” As a result, Florida still lacks a formal regulatory framework for DFS, allowing 18-year-olds to participate through FanDuel and DraftKings platforms.
• Massachusetts: The Fantasy Sports Trade Association (which includes DraftKings and FanDuel) lobbied then-Attorney General Maura Healey to set the DFS age limit at 18, arguing that because fantasy sports weren’t played inside casinos, higher age restrictions tied to alcohol were unnecessary. Healey rejected these arguments, and Massachusetts ultimately set the minimum age for DFS participation at 21.

These lobbying efforts reveal another side of the gambling industry’s expansion strategy: normalize gambling-like behaviors among younger audiences, laying the foundation for lifelong users while downplaying the known addiction risks.

Sports Betting App Playbook: Delay, Weaken, Block

The Campaign for Accountability report concludes that the gambling industry’s lobbying efforts closely mirror those used by Big Tobacco and Big Pharma: deny the risks, delay regulation, dilute protective measures, and fight enforcement at every level.

Watchdog groups are calling for federal intervention to prevent further harm, pointing to the dramatic increase in gambling addiction, debt and suicidality among young adults in recent years.

Despite public-facing claims of supporting “responsible gaming,” the industry’s aggressive lobbying record tells a different story, one where corporate profits are prioritized over consumer protection and public health.

“The stakes are not just financial—they are life and death,” said Michelle Kuppersmith, Executive Director of the Campaign for Accountability.

Lawsuits Filed Over Sports Betting Addiction and Deceptive Gambling Platforms

Amid the rising public health concerns surrounding online sports betting, lawsuits are now being pursued against major platforms like DraftKings, FanDuel, BetMGM, Caesars and others. These claims allege that sports betting apps were intentionally designed to foster compulsive gambling habits, exploiting vulnerable users through deceptive marketing, addictive features and predatory data-driven promotions.

The lawsuits focus on a range of allegations, including:

• Promoting misleading “risk-free” bets that expose users to real financial risk
• Using behavioral tracking to target high-risk gamblers with personalized incentives
• Failing to implement meaningful safeguards to prevent addiction or protect financially vulnerable individuals
• Continuing to market to users who had self-excluded or requested account closures
• Encouraging excessive betting through gamified app designs, VIP programs and loyalty rewards

Sports betting addiction lawsuits are now being reviewed nationwide for individuals between the ages of 18 and 30 who:

• Used apps like DraftKings, FanDuel, BetMGM, Caesars, ESPN Bet, Fanatics or Bet365
• Developed a gambling addiction or compulsive betting behavior
• Incurred $10,000 or more in gambling-related debt or financial losses

If you or a loved one suffered severe financial or emotional harm tied to the use of online sportsbooks, you may be entitled to pursue a claim. Lawsuits aim to recover financial losses, cover mental health treatment costs, and hold gambling companies accountable for the devastating impact of their platforms’ design and marketing practices. Click here to find out if you qualify.