Game of Skill: Illegal under the Crimes Code and Gaming Act
By Summer Pannizzo Esq., Evan Gabel Esq., and Emily Parker, Summer Associate
On Monday, June 15, 2026, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court put an end to the legal gray area in which skill games had existed in the Commonwealth. Their decision rendered skill game machines as they exist in taverns, restaurants, gas stations, and other establishments unlawful.
The Road to this Case
This case stemmed from the appeal of two separate Commonwealth Court rulings: POM of Pennsylvania, LLC v. Department of Revenue and In re: Three Pennsylvania Skill Amusement Devices, dating back to 2019 and 2023, respectively. In POM, the Commonwealth Court stated that the Gaming Act is inapplicable to skill game machines, their unlicensed operators, and the unlicensed locations in which they are operated. However, POM left the door open to the possibility that the devices may be subject to the Crimes Code. The Commonwealth Court’s decision in Three Devices closed that door when it reasoned that the devices fell outside the scope of the Crimes Code and determined that the POM devices were not a “slot machine” or gambling device.
Where Skill Games Left
Ultimately, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court determined that the skill games are subject to both the Gaming Act and the Crimes Code and, as such, reversed the orders of the Commonwealth Court in both POM and Three Devices. The Court reasoned that the skill machines meet the definition of a “slot machine” or a “hybrid slot machine”, and since the skill machines meet such definitions, no amount of skill, chance, or combination thereof will remove them from the scope of those terms.
While this decision will result in significant changes to the hospitality industry, the Court leaves the door open for the General Assembly to step in. Public policy is the prerogative of the legislative branch. Should the General Assembly choose to pass legislation regulating and enabling skill game machines, local businesses that were prohibited from skill game operations under the Court’s decision may be able to resume their activities.
Impact on Businesses
Until such time, skill game machines in the Commonwealth can be seized- along with funds connected to their operation. Individuals and entities who operate or use skill games can also be penalized. The Court has stayed its decision and prohibited law enforcement and Gaming Control Board officers from acting under its order for 120 days, in recognition of the reliance that local businesses placed on lower-court decisions that allowed the unregulated skill games industry to thrive.
In light of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision, the use and possession of skill machines by a business with a liquor license will also violate the Liquor Code, as there cannot be any unlawful gambling on licensed premises. Continuing to allow skill machines at your PLCB-licensed establishment puts your liquor license at risk of a citation or other penalty by the Bureau of Liquor Control Enforcement. Businesses should note the 120-day safe-harbor period and ensure that such skill machines are not on their premises after the safe-harbor period lapses.
For help navigating this issue, contact Attorney Evan Gabel at egabel@cgalaw.com or Attorney Summer Pannizzo at spannizzo@cgalaw.com or use the CGA online inquiry feature to set up a consultation with Attorney Gabel or Attorney Pannizzo.
The information contained herein is provided for general informational purposes only and may not reflect the current law in your jurisdiction. No information contained in this article should be construed as legal advice from CGA Law Firm. or the individual author, nor is it intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter. This article is current as of the date of original publication.
