Brazil's Supreme Court (STF) will jointly judge cases concerning gambling, municipal lotteries, and betting, with no date set.
The Plenary of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) suspended this Wednesday (4) the judgment of the Argument of Non-Compliance with Fundamental Precept (ADPF) 1212 after the reading of the report and the oral arguments. The action was presented by the Solidarity party against municipal laws and decrees that create, authorize or regulate lotteries and sports betting at the local level. In proclaiming the provisional result, the president of the Court, Minister Edson Fachin, took into account the convenience of judging the case together with the other processes on the subject: the ADIs against Law 14.790/2023, the actions against MP 1.394/2026, both under the rapporteurship of Minister Luiz Fux, and the Extraordinary Appeal (RE) 966177, which discusses the constitutionality of the prohibition of games of chance.
Reported by Minister Nunes Marques, ADPF 1212 involves state governments and municipalities. In December 2025, a preliminary injunction by the rapporteur suspended all municipal acts related to lottery operations and ordered the cessation of activities. When the trial resumes, the Plenary will decide whether to uphold the injunction and may proceed to the merits of the case. There is no set date.
The proposal to merge the cases came from Minister Flávio Dino, former Minister of Justice in Lula's government. According to BNLData, this approach serves the interests of the Presidential Palace and could hinder a preliminary decision by Fux on the Provisional Measure regarding betting.
Dino recalls August agreement.
After the oral arguments of the amici curiae, Dino asked Fachin for the floor to raise what he called a "methodological doubt." The minister recalled that, in the judgment of RE 966177, reported by Fux, he requested a review on August 13, and that it was agreed that all actions concerning gambling would be judged jointly.
"I am ready to return the case to the judge, at the discretion of the president and the eminent rapporteur Luiz Fux," said Dino, emphasizing that the request for a review was precisely aimed at facilitating the consolidation of the cases.
Fachin explained that his initial intention was to judge the issues separately, which is why he scheduled ADPF 1212 for this Wednesday. According to him, the session was dedicated to oral arguments at the suggestion of rapporteur Nunes Marques, who considered that the public hearing held the previous day on the ADIs of bets could bring elements to the case, given the "possible existence of interconnected issues" between the topics. In light of the references to the hearing made by the lawyers themselves in the courtroom, the president admitted that a joint judgment could be "the way forward."
Fux asks for time to prepare his vote.
Fux endorsed the proposal. According to him, the request for review in August did not only deal with bets, but also with lotteries and the jogo do bicho, which would require a broader approach. The minister cited as an example the participation, in the public hearing on Tuesday (3), of an entity representing the municipalities, “which we did not imagine would have any interest in that debate”.
Fux also highlighted the increase in the volume of cases: there are four ADIs (Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality) questioning the law that authorized betting and, now, another four challenging the constitutionality of the prohibition. "I will need some time to prepare a vote," he said, explaining that he has a section prepared on gambling, but that, after the public hearings, the issue of betting "deserves coherent treatment."
"Solid legal framework"
In a new intervention, Dino argued that, since it is a provisional measure, it would be prudent for the Supreme Court to have "a solid legal framework" before deciding. The minister recalled that the debate includes the Law of Criminal Offenses, Decree-Law 204/1967, which deals with lotteries and is at the center of the discussion about municipalities, and Provisional Measure 1.394/2026, "which will obviously still be deliberated by Congress."
Fachin accepted the considerations and concluded the debate by announcing that the Court will "move towards a joint hearing and judgment in due course," taking into account "this timeframe and all the vicissitudes."
Who benefits from the wait?
The course of action taken this Wednesday aligns with what Folha de S.Paulo's Painel column published on the same day, as BNLData showed in " Government plays on two tables to bury the bets ." According to the column, the government prefers to avoid a dispute in Congress and is betting on a Supreme Court decision declaring Law No. 13.756/2018, which legalized fixed-odds betting, unconstitutional. Ministers consulted on condition of anonymity said that this would "nip the problem in the bud," the same expression used by Lula at the September 23 meeting at the Alvorada Palace.
The joint trial serves this strategy on at least three fronts. The first is time. By including the Provisional Measure in a broad package that encompasses the 1941 Law of Criminal Offenses, the illegal numbers game, and municipal lotteries, the issue of betting becomes dependent on a complex trial, which will hardly be resolved in a single session, as Fux himself admitted. Meanwhile, the Provisional Measure remains in effect, the operators' licenses expired on October 25th, and bettors continue to migrate to the illegal market. The same applies to municipalities: without the Plenary's approval, Nunes Marques' injunction has remained in effect for almost a year, and municipal lotteries remain paralyzed without a collegial decision.
The second is the preliminary injunction. With the matter referred to the Plenary and the rapporteur stating that he needs time to prepare a vote that gives "coherent treatment" to all issues, it becomes more difficult to justify a monocratic decision by Fux suspending the Provisional Measure before the joint judgment. This was the main expectation of the regulated sector since the end of the public hearing.
The third point is the framing. By grouping betting with criminal offenses and the illegal lottery game known as "jogo do bicho," the debate ceases to be about a market regulated, taxed, and overseen by the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets—a market built by Congress and regulated during Lula's own government—and reverts to being treated under the generic perspective of "gambling." This is more comfortable ground for those who advocate for prohibition.
There is still a contradiction. Dino argues that the Supreme Court should wait for Congress to have a "solid legal framework." But, according to Folha, what the Planalto Palace wants is precisely for the Supreme Court to decide first and make the vote on the provisional measure unnecessary. In either case, the uncertainty favors the government, which maintains the prohibition in force without having to face the political cost of a vote.
The Congressional Clock
According to BNLData's calculations, Provisional Measure 1.394/2026 will block the agenda on November 9th, its initial deadline ends on November 23rd, and, with the suspension of the count during the parliamentary recess, it will expire on March 4th, 2027, if it is not voted on. The joint committee, with 99 amendments presented, has not yet been installed nor has it elected a president and rapporteur.
If the Supreme Court waits for Congress, and Congress lets the provisional measure expire, the sector will have lost months of operation, jobs, and revenue without either institution having ruled on the merits. Gambling is either legal or illegal; non-gambling is impossible. Every day of waiting is another day of betting on the black market, without protection for the bettor and without resources for the legal beneficiaries.
