Been a couple of news items over the last week or so regarding the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. You remember the UIGEA. You don’t? Look over yr shoulder. It’s that big black cloud over there, heading this way . . . .

First, a U.S. District Court Judge threw out the Interactive Gaming Media Entertainment and Gaming Association’s case against the U.S. government. You might remember iMEGA had attempted to have the UIGEA’s implementation postponed until it could be determined whether or not the law was unconstitutional. (They had some other points in there, too.) The case was dismissed, but iMEGA was recognized as having “legal standing” and so will surely continue the fight.

Meanwhile, we learned this week what the American Banking Association had to say about the proposed UIGEA regulations. Recall that back in October, the feds presented their proposed regulations & asked for comments. The comment period ended in mid-December, and now the Secretary of the U.S. Dept. of the Treasury and the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System are considering those comments as they prepare to “finalize” the UIGEA.

The abridged version: the ABA thinks the UIGEA is not A-OK. Gives the banks too much to do — more than they can feasibly handle. In fact, the ABA believes the UIGEA will place most banks in what they call a “compliance trap” and thus do more to hurt the American payments system than it will do to stop folks from gambling online. Read Haley Hintze’s PokerNews article & also check out the full text of the ABA’s comments over at Kick Ass Poker.

And for more from those comments to the UIGEA regs — including some of what the “webmaster of the popular blog Pokerati.com” had to say about ’em — check out Jason Kirk’s article over at PokerListings summarizing them all: “Stakeholders sound off on UIGEA regulations.”