"If there's a defect in it, then it's not up to the court to put the words in. That's what we have legislators for," Sprague said.
Two years ago, the board announced that it would accept applications to consider awarding the license a second time. Five companies are still awaiting a decision on which, if any, of them will receive it.
The minority partners, RPRS Gaming L.P., owners of 33.65 percent of SugarHouse, had argued that a second Philadelphia casino would cause them "irreparable injury."
The Gaming Control Board and Tower Entertainment Group L.L.C., one of the current applicants for the second license, filed preliminary objections to the petition by RPRS Gaming.
"The Commonwealth Court's decision recognizes what the board believes is the very clear intent of the Gaming Act - that is the board has very broad discretion to issue gaming licenses, including those which may have previously been revoked," said Doug Sherman, the gaming board's chief counsel.
According to the opinion by Judge Bernard L. McGinley, the three-judge panel agreed with the board's argument that that RPRS's interpretation would mean that "every casino in Pennsylvania will either stay in business forever or the number of casinos licensed in Pennsylvania will contract if and when an entity goes out of business or is stripped of its license."