This is a complex area and there's no simple answer, as it depends on a number of variables, including in which state the self-exclusion ban was enacted and which casino(s) or casino group(s) were involved, among other things. Before we dig into some of the nitty gritties, however, here's some background information for those unfamiliar with this concept.
Self-exclusion is a form of formal pre-commitment in which a gambler who believes he has a problem may voluntarily bar himself from entering gaming locations and agrees that the relevant venues and/or government regulators are authorized to deny him access. The first gaming jurisdiction to introduce such a program was Missouri, back in 1996, but self-banning programs are now prevalent, not just throughout the United States but worldwide, including in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, South Africa, and the U.K.
If a player is on an official exclusion list and is then found to be playing in a casino within that jurisdiction, the property can face a fine, so often the onus is on the casinos to take these lists and their implementation seriously. Similarly, if a self-banned player makes it past security, then hits a jackpot which comes to the casino's attention (usually because the sum involved passes the tax-paperwork threshold, or at least requires a hand payout), then the winnings will be confiscated as those on exclusion lists are not eligible to play and, by extension, cannot claim any jackpot won while gambling illegitimately. Prosecution under the trespass law is also a common consequence of breaking your own self-exclusion order.
In late 2011, for example, it was reported that Atlantic City's casinos had collectively seized nearly $70,000 in jackpots won in recent months by gamblers who had signed up for the state's self-exclusion list, with the biggest case involving a player who won nearly $54,000 at Bally's Atlantic City. When the patron, identified in paperwork filed by the state Division of Gaming Enforcement only as "GSD," was found to have signed up for a lifetime ban almost eight years prior, the jackpot was denied. Earlier the same year, a player identified as "YZ" was found to have played baccarat for four hours at the Borgata before being flagged by security. Once his identity and presence on the list had been confirmed, "YZ" was stripped of the $13,228 in chips he had in his possession. These and fellow casinos involved in other incidents all faced possible fines, although we don't know if they were levied in these instances. (The confiscated winnings are donated to problem-gambling awareness programs; they're not returned to the casinos' coffers.)
With regard to the specifics of how a self-ban works, as mentioned up front, it varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Here are a few examples:
So, as you can see, there's no straightforward answer to your query. Although it's likely that the ban you refer to applies only in the state in which it was enacted, if it was in a Caesars Entertainment property, for example, then be aware that this ban will also extend to all of the group's many properties in Las Vegas.
Also, as Iowa Governor Branstad pointed out, even though a person may not have gambled in years, it doesn't mean that a latent ongoing addiction isn't still lurking, just waiting for an opportunity to rear its head once more, so we would advise taking great care before someone decides to venture back to the tables or machines, even after many "clean" years have elapsed. If the original ban was an over-reaction and the excluded person is confident that he has any prior issues firmly under control, then who are we to argue? All we can do is urge caution and direct you to the Problem Gambling page on our website, which was contributed by Carol O'Hare, long-time Chairman of the Nevada Council on Problem Gambling and herself a recovering addict. There you will find some sound advice, together with warning signs to look out for and details of a helpline number to call, should that seem prudent or be deemed necessary.
