The Supreme Court ruling allowing New Jersey (and any other state) to legalize sports gambling may make legal sense, but the 6-3 decision opens a Pandora’s box that could undermine the integrity of sports and lead to increased gambling losses and addiction — especially among people who can least afford it.

Of course, the ruling will also increase the overreliance on gambling revenues by state lawmakers, who have become addicted to funding budgets by enticing residents to lose money playing casino games.

Lawmakers take an oath to protect citizens, not to enact regressive measures that prey on individuals. Yet, through the rapid expansion of casinos, lotteries — and now sports gambling — states have enacted public policies that systematically strip wealth from people and lead to increased social costs, including bankruptcies, suicides, and divorce.

In a little more than a decade, for example, Pennsylvania’s addiction to gambling has made it second only to Nevada in gaming. Since 2007, casino revenue in the state — that is, the money lost by players to slots machines and table games — is more than $30 billion.

Meanwhile, despite this activity, the state budget has not exactly remained immune to deficits.

The bigger problem of legalizing sports gambling is that it will open the industry to a bigger, more mainstream audience that will be bombarded by sophisticated marketing schemes designed to attract and keep individuals gambling.

Young people, especially males, who have grown up playing video games are particularly vulnerable to sports betting as it becomes easier to place bets via mobile phones. Indeed, the National Council on Problem Gambling says a large majority of kids have gambled before their 18th birthday.

In the NCAA, 26 percent of male student-athletes already bet on sports, according to a 2012 study. The study found one in 20 Division I men’s basketball student-athletes reported having been contacted by gamblers seeking “inside” betting information.

Supporters argue that legalized sports gambling in Europe has not impacted the games there. But a 2013 European police intelligence investigation found widespread fixing of some 380 soccer matches involving hundreds of players and officials in 15 countries. Meanwhile, a 2016 BBC report found widespread match-fixing in professional tennis over the last decade.

Legalized sports gambling will lead to more financial losses and addiction for individuals, and more pressure on players to fix games. This court ruling is a very bad bet.

—The Philadelphia Inquirer

Among the troubling findings in the sexual abuse case against a Catholic Diocese of Erie priest are indications that the two victims involved might not have been the only ones.

In announcing that his office had charged the Rev. David Poulson, 64, of Oil City, with sexually abusing two victims when they were minors, Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro noted that nine other men testified before a statewide grand jury about contact they had with Poulson as minors.

“In at least one of these cases, prosecutors believed evidence of a sexual assault existed, but it was barred on statute of limitations grounds,” Shapiro’s office said.

In other words, justice is forever out of reach of that man because of the amount of time that has passed since the alleged offense. Given the nature of the crime, that’s unacceptable.

At his news conference in Erie where he announced the charges last week, Shapiro renewed his call for eliminating the criminal statute of limitations going forward in cases involving the sexual abuse of children. We support Shapiro’s recommendation and urge the Legislature to take prompt action.

The current statute of limitations, set in 2007, allows criminal charges to be filed until the victim’s 50th birthday. Such crimes committed before the 2007 law are covered by previous statutes, which were much more restrictive.

Nothing can be done about crimes covered by those previous statutes, in criminal court at least. That means that many offenders are beyond the reach of law enforcement.

But there’s a compelling case for eliminating the criminal statute, as with homicide, given the heinous nature of the crimes and their devastating effects on the victims. The law should offer no haven for those who prey on children.

It’s not uncommon for child victims to take years, even decades, to come forward. The emotional damage of their abuse lasts long after they come of age.

Shapiro also rightly backs the elimination of the statute of limitations on civil cases brought by people who were victimized as minors. The law currently gives them until their 30th birthday to sue.

Eliminating the civil statute would offer another path to justice for those victims. The reform should also include a temporary retroactive window allowing victims to sue in cases that are now beyond the statute.

That would allow some measure of justice for those victims, and a reckoning for their abusers. Shapiro supports that provision, though some legislators claim it would be unconstitutional.