Massachusetts’ lawmakers advance bill banning in-play and prop bets
Massachusetts could be about to tighten its regulations around sports gambling after a Senate committee advanced legislation that would ban certain types of bets during games.
A proposal, introduced by state Sen. John F. Keenan, received unanimous support from the legislature’s Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies. The measure will now move to the Senate Ways and Means Committee for further consideration.
Keenan’s bill, known as the Bettor Health Act, seeks to ban in-play betting and prop bets, which allow users to bet on events during a game. Supporters of the measure argue that these types of bets may contribute to gambling addiction, especially among younger bettors.
Speaking at the committee hearing on his proposal last November, Keenan offered a heartfelt apology to Massachusetts citizens who may have been affected by gambling.
According to WWLP.com Keenan said, “I want to publicly apologize to those who’ve lost the opportunity to sit and watch a game just for the enjoyment of the game, I want to apologize to those who find themselves in the dark spaces of betting addiction, and to those working through recovery, and to their families and friends.”
The proposals would also bring additional measures, such as raising the current 20% tax on online sports betting revenue to 51%, which would be closer to the rates of neighboring states like New York, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island.
The measure would also ban gambling advertisements during sporting events.
As that bill advances, public health officials in Massachusetts have been vocal in their opposition to the state’s igaming bill, which is nearing its March deadline.
Charlotte Capewell brings her passion for storytelling and expertise in writing, researching, and the gambling industry to every article she writes. Her specialties include the US gambling industry, regulator legislation, igaming, and more.
Verticals:
Sectors:
Topics:
Dig Deeper
Related stories
2026/02/24: Utah lawmakers advance bill to ban prop bets
2025/11/14: Massachusetts lawmaker regrets vote to legalize gambling, wants to ban in-play prop bets
2026/02/05: New York latest gambling regulator to discuss banning prop bets
2026/02/26: Colorado lawmakers move to ban prop bets on sports apps
2026/02/24: Utah lawmakers advance bill to ban prop bets
2025/11/14: Massachusetts lawmaker regrets vote to legalize gambling, wants to ban in-play prop bets
2026/02/05: New York latest gambling regulator to discuss banning prop bets
2026/02/26: Colorado lawmakers move to ban prop bets on sports apps
The Backstory
A turning point for in-play and props
Massachusetts’ push to curb in-game and player proposition wagers has been building for months, driven by escalating concerns over addiction, athlete harassment and game integrity that have rippled across U.S. sports betting. The latest move on Beacon Hill follows a series of state and regulatory actions that increasingly target the speed, granularity and social media spillover of live wagering. It also aligns the state with a widening group of jurisdictions reassessing where legal markets have gone since the U.S. Supreme Court opened the door to state-by-state authorization in 2018.
The political groundwork in Massachusetts solidified when Sen. John F. Keenan, a onetime supporter of legalization, reversed course and filed the Bettor Health Act earlier this session. In January, Keenan publicly expressed regret for his 2022 vote and outlined a package to ban in-game prop bets, restrict ads during live broadcasts and increase operator contributions to problem gambling programs. That turn set the stage for broader legislative momentum behind tougher limits on high-velocity bets that critics say fuel compulsive play, especially among younger users with constant mobile access.
From regret to reform on Beacon Hill
Keenan’s mea culpa preceded the current committee advance and framed the state’s recalibration. In introducing his bill, the senator argued that the rapid rise of mobile wagering has strained families and public health services. His proposal would bar in-game props, halt sports betting ads during live televised events and lift operator payments into the public health trust fund. The measure also contemplates a higher tax burden, with supporters noting neighboring states’ steeper rates since launch. That agenda was detailed when the senator unveiled the Bettor Health Act, positioning Massachusetts to join peers tightening rules after an early expansion phase.
The vehicle for many of those changes, Senate Bill 302, has been posted on the Legislature’s website. The text of S.302 illustrates the through line from Keenan’s reversal to the committee endorsement: focus on in-play mechanics, ad curbs during games and a shift in the cost calculus for operators. While Massachusetts collected more than $315 million in sports betting taxes in its first year, the renewed emphasis on harm reduction has tempered the state’s appetite for further gambling expansion. Public health officials have pushed back against a separate iGaming proposal as its deadline nears, sharpening the political contrast between revenue gains and risk mitigation.
New York’s signal and the integrity squeeze
Massachusetts is not moving in isolation. The New York State Gaming Commission has warned sports leagues that it is reassessing player prop markets and could prohibit certain wagers outright. Inside the Empire State, regulators circulated a letter stating that game-specific player props and single-game multi-leg parlays tied to individual performance are under review, with a ban on the table if concerns persist. That posture was reported in detail by coverage of New York’s potential clampdown and by the New York Law Journal, which noted the regulator’s warning that an elimination of those bets is possible; the commission’s review letter was summarized by New York Law Journal.
Lawmakers in Albany have joined the scrutiny. Assembly Member Carrie Woerner introduced a bill to confine legal wagers to outcomes, scores or winners, effectively barring player props and most in-play wagering. New York’s shift follows a spate of cases that highlighted vulnerabilities around micro-betting and athlete targeting, including federal charges tied to college basketball point-shaving and investigations in pro baseball. The drumbeat from regulators and prosecutors has strengthened the hand of legislators pushing to narrow what can be offered in regulated markets.
States testing the boundaries: Utah and Colorado
Even states with starkly different gambling profiles are converging on the same fault lines. Utah, which bans gambling, advanced House Bill 243 to outlaw proposition betting by broadening the statutory definition of illegal wagering to capture prop markets. Sponsors said the measure is designed to head off gray areas exposed by national litigation and enforcement actions. The bill’s text, which clarifies Utah’s prohibition in the mobile era, is posted as HB0243 with a Senate committee endorsement.
Colorado, a mature online market since 2020, moved in the other direction from a starting point of permissive access. A bipartisan group introduced Senate Bill 26-131 to ban individual player props on sports apps, limit deposits, prohibit credit card use with sportsbooks and restrict daytime and evening ads. Lawmakers cited rising hotline calls and integrity concerns as reasons to tighten a system that topped $6 billion in handle last year. A document associated with the legislative push is available via a preserved link to the state’s bill files at leg.colorado.gov. Industry voices warned that curbs on popular markets could push bettors to offshore sites, a recurring argument as states calibrate consumer protection against channelization risk.
Player safety and the NCAA’s mounting pressure
College sports have become a focal point for reformers as athlete harassment tied to lost bets surges on social media. NCAA President Charlie Baker has urged states to prohibit college props and moved to constrain the supply of data used to fuel negative outcomes wagering. In April, the NCAA extended its data deal with Genius Sports with a new clause that blocks betting on negative props using NCAA data, a shift described in Inside Asian Gaming’s report on athlete protections. The governing body also tracks online abuse and says more than half of students aged 18 to 22 have bet on sports, with athletes facing intensified pressure.
The confluence of data distribution, sportsbook markets and social media has raised stakes for regulators weighing where to draw lines. Negative props can incentivize bettors to root for mistakes, which has fueled direct messages and threats to athletes after losses. By targeting in-game and granular player markets, lawmakers and regulators aim to reduce that feedback loop, even as fans and bettors have grown accustomed to live, personalized odds on their phones.
What tighter rules could mean next
If Massachusetts proceeds with bans on in-play and player props, operators would face a leaner catalog and higher compliance costs. A steeper tax rate and tighter ad windows would further squeeze margins. The mix could slow marketing, reduce promotional spend and push books to emphasize pregame outcomes and futures, where risk is easier to model and integrity concerns are lower. That mirrors trends taking shape in New York and Colorado, where policymakers are signaling a pivot from expansion to consolidation and guardrails.
For consumers, limits on high-frequency bets could curb chasing and the rapid wagering cycles linked to problem gambling. Deposit caps and card restrictions, as proposed in Colorado, would add friction to spending. But curbs carry trade-offs. Popular markets that vanish from legal apps may migrate to offshore sites with no consumer recourse. That risk will test whether regulators can narrow offerings without undermining the legal market’s appeal. As more states review their menus, Massachusetts’ next steps will be closely watched for how they balance integrity, public health and the realities of a competitive multistate industry.
