Brazil's Attorney General Asks the STF to Void the Betting Laws as Operators Press Fux to Rule Before Midnight

The government's lawyer has told the Supreme Federal Tribunal that the laws which created Brazil's licensed betting market are unconstitutional, reversing the position it took in 2024. It did so in a different case from the one in which Justice Luiz Fux gave it 72 hours, and operators, clubs and Flamengo want his answer on the ban before licensed sites go dark at midnight.

• Attorney General Jorge Messias asked the Supreme Federal Tribunal (STF) on 2 October to declare unconstitutional articles 29 to 35 of Law 13.756 of 2018 and most of Law 14.790 of 2023, the two laws that created and regulated fixed-odds betting in Brazil
• The filing was made in ADI 7749, the Prosecutor-General's challenge to the laws, in answer to an order of 28 August; Fux's 72-hour order of 2 October sits in ADI 7721, as we reported on Friday, and by Monday morning that docket showed no reply from the Attorney General's Office (AGU)
• The AGU, which told the court in ADI 7721 that the 2023 law was "still constitutional", now cites a 140% rise in public health service care for gambling disorder, a net R$62.5 billion outflow from household budgets in 2025 and an illegal market of 41% to 51%, while conceding that its health figures do not isolate betting
• The National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL), the Brazilian Institute for Responsible Gaming (IBJR) and Flamengo have asked Fux to suspend Provisional Measure 1.394 before 23:59 on Monday, when withdrawals close and licensed sites must go offline, and 22 other clubs have also gone to the court
• The AGU's filing does not mention the measure, and by Monday morning Fux had not ruled on any request to suspend it

The AGU Now Says the Licensed Market Was Unconstitutional From the Start

The Attorney General's Office has changed sides on Brazil's betting laws. In a 27-page manifestation signed by Attorney General Jorge Messias at 16:22 on Friday 2 October, and entered as an AGU petition on the ADI 7749 docket at 18:13, it asks the STF to strike down "the normative core" of fixed-odds betting: articles 29 to 35 of Law 13.756 of 2018, which created the product, and articles 1 to 21, 22 to 24, 25 to 40, 43 to 48 and 54 of Law 14.790 of 2023, which regulated it. ADI 7749 was brought in November 2024 by the Prosecutor-General of the Republic, who argues the laws protect fundamental rights insufficiently.

The filing acknowledges the reversal. In ADI 7721, brought by the National Confederation of Commerce in Goods, Services and Tourism (CNC), the AGU had called the 2023 law "ainda constitucional, sujeita a processo de progressiva inconstitucionalização" (still constitutional, subject to a process of progressive unconstitutionality), on two premises: striking down the 2023 law alone would leave betting under the weaker 2018 regime, and the rules were too new to judge. It now says the monitoring period has elapsed and the indicators show "persistência e agravamento dos danos" (the persistence and worsening of the harms). Asking for both laws to fall answers the first premise.

The Evidence, With the AGU's Own Caveats

The AGU cites a Health Ministry note recording a rise of about 140% between January 2018 and December 2025 in public health system (SUS) care under the codes for pathological gambling, but concedes the figures "não isolam os casos decorrentes das apostas de quota fixa" (do not isolate cases arising from fixed-odds betting). It cites a state finance secretaries' estimate of a net R$62.5 billion (approximately $12 billion) outflow from family budgets in 2025, and a CNC estimate that about 268,000 families fell more than 90 days behind on payments between January 2023 and March 2026, while accepting that household debt has "causas múltiplas" (multiple causes).

On design, it argues that self-exclusion and self-set limits depend on the self-control that gambling disorder destroys, and that neither law caps losses, stakes or session length. It cites a Justice Ministry note finding that crash games were six of the ten most popular games at one licensed operator. It puts the illegal market at 41% to 51% of the total and concedes that anti-money-laundering duties bind only licensed operators, "aqueles que não constituem o vetor do ilícito" (those who are not the vector of the wrongdoing). "O 'dragão' era indomável" (the "dragon" was untameable), it concludes. The filing is written in the past tense and does not mention Provisional Measure 1.394. BNLData, a Brazilian trade title that has opposed the ban, says several of the studies it relies on have been disputed.

The 72 Hours Ran in a Different Case

The case numbers are not interchangeable. The STF dockets show that Fux's order of 2 October, "Intime-se o Advogado-Geral da União para manifestação no prazo de 72 horas" (summon the Attorney General to respond within 72 hours), was entered in ADI 7721, where the operators have brought their challenge to the measure, and served the same day. The AGU's manifestation was filed in ADI 7749 and says it answers an order Fux made in that case on 28 August. Some reports have presented it as the reply to the 72-hour order; the dockets show it was not. Fux reports on ADIs 7721, 7723 and 7749 together, and on the three actions against the measure, ADIs 8024, 8027 and 8028. By early Monday, the ADI 7721 docket showed no AGU filing since the order.

Operators and Clubs Set a Midnight Deadline

The ANJL, in a petition dated 2 October and prepared with the IBJR, asked Fux to decide "antes das 23h59 de segunda-feira, 5 de outubro de 2026" (before 23:59 on Monday 5 October). It wants the measure suspended in full with retroactive effect until Congress votes on it or the court rules on the merits, or failing that suspended for licensed operators or its deadlines extended, and the Finance Ministry, the Central Bank, Anatel and Caixa told to stop implementing it. It argues the measure lacks urgency, notes that 83 companies paid R$2.55 billion (approximately $490 million) for 85 five-year licences, and says the AGU's own 72-hour request of 28 September lapsed without a response. On Saturday the two associations filed again in ADI 8027 against Justice Ministry letters ordering licensed sites redirected to a government page, which the ANJL has told members to ignore.

Flamengo asked on Saturday for a ruling before 23:59 on 5 October, citing a master sponsorship worth about R$268.5 million (approximately $51.6 million) a season that runs to 2028, according to BNLData. Seventeen clubs from the top two divisions, including Fluminense and Botafogo, asked on 2 October to join ADI 8027, and five more, including São Paulo, asked for a transition of six months to a year. Members of the government fear Fux will suspend the measure, Metrópoles columnist Matheus Leitão reported on Saturday. Sunday's first round sent President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Senator Flávio Bolsonaro to a run-off on 25 October, according to electoral court figures reported by DOL.

The Government Has Argued Against the Laws, Not for the Measure

If the STF accepts that the 2018 and 2023 laws are unconstitutional, the operators' strongest argument, that the state cannot sell five-year licences and take them back in 30 days, loses its footing, because the licences would rest on void law. The filing also gives the government a fallback: if Fux suspends the measure, the request to strike down the laws remains. What it does not do is defend the measure on the grounds the operators attack, relevance and urgency, which the ANJL and IBJR say is what the 72-hour order asked about. The AGU may still file in ADI 7721. If it does not, Fux will decide the injunction requests on the operators' papers alone.

The Legal Argument Is Stronger Than the Numbers

The filing's most persuasive point is legal. The Constitution reserves to federal law the means of protecting families from advertising of harmful products, and limits on advertising, sponsorship and influencers sit in Finance Ministry ordinances rather than in either statute; the STF itself had to apply those ordinances by injunction. The statistical case is weaker by the AGU's own account: its health series begins seven years before the licensed market opened on 1 January 2025, and, as BNLData notes, two of its economic estimates rest on the same R$62.5 billion figure. Its most telling number cuts the other way. An illegal share of 41% to 51%, which an LCA Consultores estimate cited by the ANJL puts at 38% to 44% this year, is not something that ending the licensed market reduces directly.

After Midnight the Court Is Ruling on a Different Market

Under the measure, withdrawals close at 23:59 on Monday, licensed sites go offline on 6 October, balances pass to the banks within days and the licences are extinguished on 25 October, the day of the run-off. Under Article 62 of the Constitution, relationships formed while a provisional measure is in force stay governed by it even if Congress rejects it, unless Congress legislates otherwise, which is why the ANJL calls the harm irreversible. An injunction on Tuesday would ask companies to restart platforms that have shut down and are handing balances to the banks. Fux's record cuts both ways: he has restricted betting advertising and the use of welfare money to bet, but has not suspended the 2023 law as a whole.

The government defended the licensed market in court in 2024 and now asks the court to declare it void. Whether Fux rules before midnight or after, the sites go dark under the measure while the government's case is argued on the laws.