ANJL to Challenge Minas Betting Advertising Decree at Supreme Court
Brazil.- 25 August 2026 | www.zonadeazar.com Brazil’s National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) has announced plans to file a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality before the Federal Supreme Court against a Minas Gerais government decree banning online betting advertising across state-owned public assets and spaces.
The measure includes the Mineirão stadium and forms part of a broader strategy by the state government to restrict the commercial visibility of betting brands.
ANJL Challenges State Authority
The association argues that Minas Gerais has moved into an area already regulated at federal level.
According to ANJL, state-level restrictions risk creating:
- Legal uncertainty.
- Different rules between states.
- Reduced predictability for authorised operators.
- Overlapping regulatory powers.
The organisation believes the fixed-odds betting framework should retain nationwide regulatory consistency.
Decree Covers Public Spaces
The ban was announced by Minas Gerais Governor Mateus Simões.
It prevents betting advertising across public spaces and assets controlled by the state.
The Mineirão is among the properties affected.
The government also plans to send guidance to municipalities explaining how similar restrictions could be introduced in locally controlled public spaces.
Loteria Mineira Also Affected
The Minas Gerais government also announced that Loteria Mineira will no longer be allowed to operate fixed-odds betting.
Simões said the state lottery would be notified to terminate its existing concession agreement linked to the activity.
The decision therefore extends beyond advertising and directly affects public-sector participation in the betting vertical.
Growing Wave of Local Restrictions
Minas Gerais joins a number of Brazilian cities and jurisdictions introducing restrictions on betting advertising.
Similar initiatives have already emerged in:
- Rio de Janeiro.
- Belo Horizonte.
- Aracaju.
- Cuiabá.
São Paulo is also considering its own restrictions on gambling advertising in public spaces.
ANJL Seeks Regulatory Uniformity
ANJL’s central legal argument is that fixed-odds betting regulation belongs primarily within federal jurisdiction.
The association believes substantially different rules across individual states could fragment a market designed to operate through national licences and federal standards.
It is therefore asking the Supreme Court to clarify how far states can go in restricting advertising by federally authorised operators.
Rio Grande do Sul Precedent
ANJL has already brought a similar dispute before the Supreme Court involving Rio Grande do Sul.
In that case, the association challenged state legislation passed in April introducing a series of restrictions on betting advertising.
Brazil’s Prosecutor-General’s Office subsequently supported the challenge based on the constitutional division of powers between the federal government and states.
Constitutional Debate
The Minas Gerais dispute adds a new dimension to Brazil’s betting-regulation debate.
The question is no longer only whether advertising restrictions are desirable, but also which level of government has the authority to impose them.
The Supreme Court may need to consider the interaction between:
- Federal betting regulation.
- State powers.
- Use of public assets.
- Commercial advertising.
- Regulatory uniformity.
Industry Context
Brazil launched its federally regulated fixed-odds betting market under a national framework intended to establish common standards for authorised operators.
At the same time, individual states and municipalities have started imposing additional restrictions relating to advertising and brand visibility.
This overlap is creating a new phase of litigation over the regulatory boundaries between federal and local authorities.
Next Steps or Impact
ANJL will now move to formally file its Direct Action of Unconstitutionality before the Supreme Court.
The outcome could have implications well beyond Minas Gerais.
A Supreme Court ruling may establish an important precedent determining how far states and municipalities can go in imposing their own betting-advertising restrictions within a federally regulated market.
For operators, the case will be relevant in determining whether Brazil retains a relatively uniform advertising framework or moves towards increasingly fragmented local rules.
Editó: @fonta
