Two prominent Brazilian trade organizations, the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) and the Brazilian Institute of Responsible Gaming (IBJR), have appealed to Supreme Court Minister Luiz Fux, asking for the immediate suspension of a recently enacted ban on online betting. This ban originated from Provisional Measure 1.394, implemented on Friday, which prohibits the operation of betting sites in Brazil from this point forward.
The organizations argue that this ban is not only “opportunistic and extremely serious” but also infringes upon constitutional principles, raising concerns that it could inflict irreversible harm on the sector.
In their capacity as amici curiae, or “friends of the court,” ANJL and IBJR are providing third-party support in several Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality (ADIs)—specifically ADIs 7.721, 7.723, and 7.749. They contend that a key requirement for the issuance of a Provisional Measure is proof of urgency, which they argue is absent in this case.
Citing official statistics from the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA), they note that the market did not experience any significant surge in betting activity that would warrant such an emergency intervention. Furthermore, between October 2025 and June 2026, the financial volume of bets actually declined by 42%.
The statement highlights that during the legislative drafting of Law 14.790/2023, the government itself had pushed for the regulation of betting, advising against amendments that would restrict access for at-risk groups. ANJL and IBJR assert that the Provisional Measure represents a political shift devoid of a technical justification.
They also express concerns about creating regulatory chaos and legal uncertainty. According to the organizations, this Provisional Measure dismantles a market framework that had been established, authorized, and monitored by the government since January 2025. Companies within this market invested BRL 30 million ($5.7 million) for licenses, contributing to technology, security, customer service, and responsible gaming initiatives.
The abrupt revocation of these licenses, they argue, would violate legal certainty and the principle of legitimate expectation. "The Brazilian state invited private agents to enter the market and now intends to void the economic content of the authorizations it granted," they write.
The trade bodies also pointed out that the Provisional Measure fails to account for its budgetary implications, as required by Article 113 of the Transitional Constitutional Provisions Act. In 2025, the sector contributed BRL 9.95 billion in federal taxes and BRL 2.5 billion in grants, while generating BRL 95.5 million in inspection fees. The immediate ban could cut off future revenues and lead to additional costs like severance payments mandated by Brazilian labor laws.
Another significant concern raised is that the ban could drive bettors to participate in illegal betting markets which currently comprise between 41% and 51% of the market share, according to referenced studies. These unregulated platforms offer scant protection for consumers, lack necessary user safeguards, and have weak anti-money laundering practices.
The potential drop in consumer protections is especially worrisome for problem gamblers, a point emphasized in the groups’ submission to the Supreme Federal Court.
In light of these issues, ANJL and IBJR have requested Minister Fux to postpone the enforcement of Provisional Measure 1.394 until Congress or the Supreme Court reaches a decision on the pending ADIs. They have asked for at least a six-month extension on the deadlines established in the measure and for federal agencies to refrain from executing any asset freezes, revocations of licenses, or fund forfeitures during this suspension period.
The amici curiae brief aims to expedite the Supreme Federal Court's proceedings regarding the constitutionality of Law 14.790.
Additionally, the National Association for the Legal Security of Games and Betting (Anseja) has also filed an ADI against the Provisional Measure to the Supreme Federal Court. Anseja seeks an urgent precautionary measure to halt the impact of Provisional Measure 1.394 until its constitutionality can be confirmed.
Highlighting similar concerns, Anseja asserts that the measure was introduced without valid urgency, violating constitutional provisions, and it threatens to disrupt a market that has been regulated by the federal government since 2025. They characterize the shutdown of online betting platforms as “the first irreversible effect of the Provisional Measure.”
Anseja has also pointed out various flaws in the measure, including the absence of proven urgency and the lack of a fiscal impact assessment. It underscores that a provisional measure should not be used for seizing assets or for criminalizing advertising, as this could lead to legal repercussions.
The organization insists that the Provisional Measure disregards fiscal responsibility obligations, impacting public revenues and existing contractual obligations. Anseja echoes the assertion that the measure undermines the state’s legal obligation to prohibit expropriation without compensation.
In addition to requesting immediate suspension, Anseja is seeking recognition of the identified formal and substantive defects and the preservation of current operating licenses until a final ruling is issued.
