Attorneys for the state have filed to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the investigation that roiled Iowa collegiate athletic programs and resulted in multiple criminal charges.
More than 20 people, mostly student athletes at the University of Iowa and Iowa State University, were accused last year of underage gambling and identity theft, the latter for allegedly using other peoples' online gambling accounts to place wagers on athletic events. Nineteen pleaded guilty and were fined $645 for underage gambling, while six more had their charges dismissed.
The sweeping investigation also caused major turmoil for both schools' athletics departments, with multiple athletes — including Iowa State's then-starting quarterback — facing suspensions or other discipline for violating NCAA rules. In several cases, prosecutors alleged, athletes had placed bets on their own teams, although regulators found no evidence the wagers "called into question the integrity" of any competition.
The accused students and former students sued the state, the Division of Criminal Investigation and individual investigators in April, accusing officials of violating their rights in multiple ways during the investigation. In particular, several players claim investigators told them the investigation was against the sportsbooks and they would not face charges — an allegation their attorneys said was backed up by at least one DCI investigator who claimed in a deposition he had in turn been misled on the question by his superiors.
The plaintiffs also claim the state illegally accessed the students' data by using, without obtaining a warrant, a software tool provided by a monitoring company to see the locations from which they accessed gambling apps. That technique proved controversial, and several cases were dismissed after GeoComply, provider of the software, cut off the DCI's access due to alleged misuse.
State claims searches were legal, seeks qualified immunity
On Friday, the Iowa Attorney General's Office filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit and all its claims.
The plaintiffs who gambled on other users' accounts "had no reasonable or actual expectation of privacy in gambling accounts they didn’t own," and thus can't sue for violations of those rights, the state argues. Even if there was such a violation, the motion says, the state should be shielded under the doctrine of "qualified immunity" because there was no prior caselaw holding such location data searches violate the Fourth Amendment.
The motion also argues that state agencies are immune from suit under the 11th Amendment, meaning the plaintiffs cannot sue for allegedly unconstitutional policies or customs that led to the allegedly defective searches. And to the extent that the plaintiffs faced consequences for their gambling, the state says in many cases that came in the form of NCAA suspensions, for which the state is not responsible and that, in some cases, predated the state's criminal charges.
"Here, plaintiffs’ own rules violations caused their suspensions and related injuries," the state argues. "Plaintiffs should not gain from their own illicit activity."
The plaintiffs have not yet responded to Friday's motion in court. In their complaint, their attorneys wrote that the DCI's alleged misconduct severely upended "their lives, collegiate careers and future opportunities."
William Morris covers courts for the Des Moines Register. He can be contacted at wrmorris2@registermedia.com or 715-573-8166.
Most Popular
Comments / 0