The Office of the Attorney General (PGR) stated this Monday (17) that it considers Law No. 16,508/2026, from Rio Grande do Sul, unconstitutional, and asked the Federal Supreme Court (STF) for a precautionary suspension of the rule.
This opinion could become the precedent that serves as a benchmark for dozens of similar state and municipal laws across the country. The document was signed by the Attorney General, Paulo Gonet Branco.
This includes restricted broadcast hours (9 PM to 6 AM), a requirement for warnings covering 15% of the ad area, and a ban on content with youth appeal.
ADI 7,971 was filed by the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) and is under the rapporteurship of Justice Cármen Lúcia.
See the full document below:
ANJL’s Position
For the ANJL, the author of the lawsuit, the PGR’s opinion reinforces the argument that authority over advertising in the sector belongs exclusively to the federal government.
In a statement, the association’s president, Plínio Lemos Jorge, said that the PGR’s position represents “an important step forward for consolidating a regulated, safe, and legally stable environment in the country” and highlighted the measure’s role in combating the illegal market.
According to the ANJL, this harms consumers, authorized companies, and state tax revenue.
Reasoning
The PGR states that the RS law goes beyond consumer protection. It creates its own rules on advertising, sponsorship, oversight, and penalties for betting, which, according to Article 22 of the Constitution, falls under the exclusive authority of the federal government.
The opinion points to two additional problems. First, the law interferes with telecommunications and broadcasting by addressing ad placement, website blocking, and provider obligations, which are also matters of federal authority.
Second, by creating joint liability among platforms, advertising agencies, and media outlets, the law enters the realm of Civil and Commercial Law, another area that falls exclusively under federal jurisdiction.
Gonet Branco acknowledges that Federal Law 14,790/2023 does not solve all the problems in the betting sector. But this does not give states the right to legislate on the matter.
Finally, the opinion notes that STF Binding Precedent No. 2 already prohibits states from legislating on lotteries. It asks the STF to rule on the merits of the case once and for all, without further delay.
The PGR’s position follows the statement from the Office of the Attorney General of the Union (AGU), which had already requested the suspension of the law in June, on the same grounds of infringement on federal authority, a dispute that staging-latam.next.io/ had already been following since the federal government’s first statements on the case.
Why the Urgency
The PGR states that the STF cannot wait for the normal course of proceedings, because the law is already in effect and producing concrete effects: sponsorship contracts, advertising campaigns, and the actions of media outlets and digital platforms are already being shaped by a rule that the PGR considers unconstitutional.
The 120-day period the law gives companies to adapt is already underway, meaning the market is adjusting to a rule that could be struck down.
For this reason, Gonet Branco recommends that the STF not limit itself to ruling on the preliminary injunction (a provisional measure) and instead convert the judgment into a final decision, since both sides’ arguments have already been fully presented in the case.
A Case That Could Apply to the Whole Country
What is being judged at the STF goes beyond Rio Grande do Sul. In recent months, municipalities such as Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte, Aracaju, São Paulo, Cuiabá, and Porto Alegre have enacted or proposed rules restricting betting advertising in public spaces, street furniture, and events, and at least one state bill follows the same path in Bahia.
According to the PGR’s own opinion, the case “could become a leading case regarding the validity of the numerous municipal and state laws that have banned or restricted advertising for betting and online gaming platforms in the country, establishing a binding precedent for all lower courts.”
What’s Still Pending
The PGR’s opinion is advisory and does not bind the STF. The decision on the preliminary injunction rests with Justice Cármen Lúcia, the case’s rapporteur, or with the Court’s full bench.
If the suspension is confirmed, the PGR notes that this would not legalize betting advertising in RS; on the contrary, it would keep operators subject only to the sanctions of federal legislation, given the assessment that this is still insufficient for the sector.
The case is seen as a possible binding precedent for dozens of state and municipal laws that have restricted betting advertising in the country in recent months.