Definition
A raffle is a form of chance-based distribution in which participants purchase tickets or shares, and a winner is selected by random drawing or lot to receive a prize. The essential structure: consideration (ticket purchase), chance (random selection), and prize. These three elements also define a lottery, and the relationship between the two terms has generated persistent legal tension.
Historically, the term carried a narrower meaning — participants contributed equal shares toward the full value of a staked item, with the winner taking the whole. Modern usage is broader: the prize need not equal the total consideration paid, and the random mechanism is typically a drawing rather than dice.
In most contemporary legal frameworks, raffles are treated as a regulated subset of gambling or lottery activity. Many jurisdictions carve out explicit statutory exceptions permitting nonprofit or charitable raffles that would otherwise violate general lottery prohibitions.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): A drawing, often held as a fundraiser, in which tickets or chances are sold to win a prize.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): A kind of lottery in which several persons pay, in shares, the value of something put up as a stake, and then determine by chance (as by casting dice) which one of them shall become the sole possessor.
The common and legal meanings are largely aligned in structure, but the legal meaning carries significant regulatory weight that the common definition obscures. Calling something a "raffle" in ordinary speech suggests a benign church fundraiser; in law, the same activity may constitute illegal gambling unless it falls within a specific statutory exemption. The casual connotation of harmlessness is not a legal defense.
Common Confusion
RAFFLE vs. LOTTERY: The historical dictionaries flag this directly. Bouvier and Black's (1st ed.) both note that a raffle "has been held not to be a lottery," citing South Carolina authority. This distinction was meaningful in early American law, where lottery prohibitions were common but raffle prohibitions were not always co-extensive. Modern statutes in most jurisdictions have largely collapsed the distinction — both are treated as lottery-type activities subject to the same three-element test (consideration, chance, prize). Researchers should not assume that a historical source treating raffles and lotteries as legally distinct reflects current law.
RAFFLE vs. SWEEPSTAKES: A sweepstakes eliminates the consideration element (no purchase required to enter), taking it outside lottery regulation. A raffle requires paid tickets. Conflating the two leads to errors in regulatory analysis.
Core Elements
Most jurisdictions apply the same three-element test to raffles that they apply to lotteries:
1. CONSIDERATION: A participant must give something of value — typically a ticket purchase price — to enter.
2. CHANCE: The winner is determined by random selection, not skill.
3. PRIZE: The winner receives something of value.
All three elements must be present. Charitable raffle exemptions typically do not eliminate these elements — they simply authorize the activity despite them.
Recognized Forms
/SUBTYPES
CHARITABLE RAFFLE: Conducted by a nonprofit or qualifying organization for fundraising purposes. The most common statutory exception to lottery prohibition. Typically subject to licensing, prize caps, and restrictions on who may operate the raffle.
PRIZE RAFFLE: A raffle in which the prize is a specific item or cash sum, distinct from the pooled-stake model described in historical sources.
REVERSE RAFFLE: A variant in which tickets are drawn and eliminated; the last ticket remaining wins. Treated as a raffle for regulatory purposes in most jurisdictions.
Why It Matters in Research
The raffle/lottery distinction is a trap in historical sources. Pre-twentieth-century cases and statutes may treat raffles as categorically outside lottery law — a position that the 2 Mills citation in Black's and Bouvier reflects. Researchers relying on those sources for a modern regulatory question will find the ground has shifted. Most states have either expressly included raffles in their lottery statutes or addressed them separately in gambling codes.
The charitable raffle exemption is the live issue in most modern research. These exemptions vary substantially in their scope: some jurisdictions limit them to specific types of organizations (religious, veterans, educational), others impose prize caps, and some require advance registration or licensure. A researcher looking at whether a specific raffle is lawful must locate the applicable exemption statute, not just the general lottery prohibition.
Historical sources also reflect the older dice-based model of raffles, which is largely obsolete. When reading nineteenth-century cases involving raffles, the mechanism described may differ from modern ticket-drawing raffles, but courts generally applied the same analytical framework.
Anderson's Dictionary of Law offers no independent definition, redirecting entirely to GAME and LOTTERY — a useful signal that even in the nineteenth century, the term's legal content was understood through its relationship to those neighboring categories.
Historical Dictionary Support
The historical sources agree on the basic structure: equal-share contribution, single winner, determination by chance. Black's (both editions), Bouvier, and Webster's 1913 are nearly identical in their core descriptions, all drawing on Webster's dictionary definition rather than developing an independent legal formulation. This reflects the term's ambiguous position — raffl was widely understood but not always directly addressed by statute.
The most significant point of divergence is the raffle/lottery distinction. Black's (1st ed.) and Bouvier both cite the proposition that a raffle is not a lottery, but this was not universally accepted even then. Black's (2nd ed.) adds case citations showing courts in Texas, Missouri, and New York engaging with the question, suggesting active litigation over the line. The cited cases (Prendergast v. State, State v. Kennon, People v. American Art Union) reflect the contested state of the law in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
None of the historical dictionaries address the charitable raffle exemption, which is a twentieth-century statutory development and entirely absent from the historical shelf.
Jurisdictional Note
Raffle regulation is almost entirely state law. Most states permit charitable raffles under specific conditions while prohibiting commercial raffles. A minority of states impose stricter limits. Federal law generally does not regulate raffles directly unless interstate commerce or mail is involved, in which case federal lottery statutes may apply.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
See Law Mind Encyclopedia: Lottery Law; Gambling Regulation; Charitable Gaming.