Ministry of Sports and Minas Gerais tell the STF that MP 1.394 rendered the case against the betting advertising decree moot

The Ministry of Sports and the government of Minas Gerais argued to the STF that MP 1.394/2026 rendered ADI 8.014 moot — the ANJL's case against Minas Gerais Decree 49.279/2026. The filings were addressed to reporting justice Flávio Dino, who had already denied the injunction requested by the association on September 21.

According to BNLData, the legal opinion from the Ministry of Sports' Legal Advisory Office was signed on October 13 and approved the following day by legal counsel Guilherme Assunção Fagundes. The ministry's technical directorate concluded that, since October 6, no fixed-odds betting advertising would be lawful anywhere in the country, with or without the Minas Gerais decree.

The petition from the Minas Gerais government (AGE/GAB/ASSGAB No. 879/2026), also according to BNLData, is dated October 19 and was signed by Governor Mateus Simões on October 20. In the state's view, the MP reduces the «utilidade prática» of the relief sought by the ANJL, because the same advertising would remain prohibited under the federal rule.

What MP 1.394 establishes

According to the Diário Oficial da União, MP 1.394, dated September 25, 2026, prohibits all communication, advertising, and promotional actions related to fixed-odds betting throughout the national territory. The rule set a ten-day deadline from publication for the removal of advertising materials and sponsorship signage displayed on physical or digital media. According to the Ministry of Finance, betting websites and apps were to become unavailable starting October 6.

Dispute remains open

The Ministry of Sports itself noted, according to BNLData, that the Minas Gerais decree remains formally in effect — the MP did not repeal it — and that the Provisional Measure has a temporary validity period. It is up to Flávio Dino to decide whether ADI 8.014 has become moot.

The Minas Gerais government, for its part, acknowledges that the validity of the MP itself is being challenged in other cases before the STF. If the Provisional Measure lapses or is declared unconstitutional, the issue raised in ADI 8.014 may regain relevance.