Nunes Marques admits ABRASF and Itaquaquecetuba as amici curiae and expands debate on municipal lotteries in ADPF 1212.
Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Nunes Marques decided on Monday (August 24) to admit the Brazilian Association of Finance Secretaries (ABRASF) and the Municipality of Itaquaquecetuba (SP) as amici curiae in the Argument of Non-Compliance with Fundamental Precept (ADPF) 1212, which discusses the constitutionality of municipal laws that created their own lotteries, raffle systems, and betting schemes. In the decision, the rapporteur considered the requirements of relevance of the matter, representativeness of the applicants, and connection with the object of the action to be present, based on articles 6, §2, of Law 9.882/1999, and 7, §2, of Law 9.868/1999.
With this new admission, ADPF 1212 now has at least 14 entities and federative bodies authorized to participate in the process, including industry associations, states, and municipalities — one of the broadest instances of procedural pluralization ever seen in the Supreme Court's judgment of a matter related to the betting sector.
The case
The lawsuit was filed in March 2025 by the Solidarity party against regulations from at least 13 municipalities — including São Paulo, Guarulhos, Campinas, São Vicente and Poá (SP), Belo Horizonte (MG), Anápolis and Caldas Novas (GO), Foz do Iguaçu (PR), Pelotas and Porto Alegre (RS), Bodó (RN) and Miguel Pereira (RJ) — that established their own lotteries and betting systems. The party argues that the matter falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Union to legislate on lotteries and consortia (Article 22, XX, of the Constitution), and that the residual power reserved to the States by Article 25, §1, does not extend to municipalities.
On December 3, 2025, Nunes Marques granted a single-judge injunction suspending, throughout the national territory, the effectiveness of municipal laws that created lotteries and betting schemes, ordering the immediate closure of ongoing operations—including those already delegated to private companies—under penalty of a daily fine of R$ 500 for the municipalities and R$ 50 for mayors and directors of the operators. The injunction was submitted to the Virtual Plenary for review, but a request for a separate vote by Minister Flávio Dino moved the judgment to an in-person session.
Judgment released to the Plenary.
Almost nine months after the injunction—and following successive rounds of amici curiae admissions—the rapporteur has now released ADPF 1212 for judgment in the full Supreme Court. This is the stage that should definitively determine whether the operation of lotteries and betting can be decentralized to municipalities or whether it remains under the exclusive regulation of the Union and the States—a point that exposes direct tensions with the federal model for regulating the fixed-odds betting market consolidated by Law 14.790/2023.
Map of amici curiae in ADPF 1212
PRO-MUNICIPAL AUTONOMY (they defend the constitutionality of lotteries created by municipalities)
| Organization | central argument |
| ANALOME | Municipalities are autonomous federative entities with their own powers (article 30 of the Federal Constitution); it invokes ADPFs 492/493 to argue that the logic that freed the States also applies to the municipalities. |
| EARNS | He defends the validity of municipal lotteries, citing previous Supreme Court jurisprudence. |
| FNP (National Front of Mayors) | It represents municipalities with over 80 inhabitants (61% of the population, 75% of the GDP); it contests the decision because it infringes on municipal autonomy. |
| Municipality of Itaquaquecetuba | It defends the validity of its own local law, arguing that the municipality has the authority to operate the service. |
| ABRASF | Association of Municipal Finance Secretariats — the admission is recent (August 24th) and I haven't yet located the merit statement, but the institutional mission (defending the fiscal autonomy of municipalities) points in that direction. It's worth confirming before making a definitive statement about the matter. |
PRO-FEDERAL/STATE EXCLUSIVITY (against municipal jurisdiction)
| Organization | central argument |
| ANJL | He called the decision a "corrective measure" for municipalities that were creating rules disconnected from federal regulations. |
| CEF | Holder of the exclusive federal lottery rights since 1969; requests full acceptance of the ADPF (Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental - Claim of Non-Compliance with a Fundamental Precept). |
| Paraná / Lottopar | He went even further: he asked the Supreme Court to prohibit even IP address betting from outside municipal boundaries. |
| Santa Catarina | It has its own state lottery (LOTESC); requests full documentation. |
| Espírito Santo | Same line as the other States |
| Rondônia | Same line |
| Maranhao | Same line |
| São Paulo | It argues that municipalities legislating on lotteries would generate "normative fragmentation" and legal uncertainty. |
Who is already in the race?
Since August 2025, the process has been receiving applications for membership at a steady pace — from lottery sector associations to states that already operate or intend to operate their own lotteries, including municipal entities and, now, a municipality directly affected by the suspension. Details of each entity and its position in the federal debate — municipalities vs. states/federal government — are in the table attached to this article.
The Attorney General's Office (AGU) has also expressed its opinion in the case file, supporting the argument for the Union's (and, residually, the States') exclusive right to operate lotteries, thus agreeing with the Solidarity party's request.
As of the time of writing, there is no confirmed date for the in-person hearing.
