States can regulate prediction markets as gambling, federal appeals court rules
A federal appeals court has ruled that states can regulate prediction markets as gambling, in a legal battle involving Kalshi and New Jersey regulators. The National Football League supports this regulation, arguing that sports prediction contracts are effectively gambling and should be overseen by states to prevent consumer harm. Conflicting judicial actions have created uncertainty around prediction markets.
Listen to Live Briefing
Real-time synthesized voice briefing · Live Feeds Desk
- ✓ The NFL has filed an amicus brief supporting New Jersey regulators in a legal battle against Kalshi, arguing that sports prediction contracts are effectively gambling.
- ✓ US appeals courts have issued conflicting rulings on the regulation of prediction markets.
- ✓ Prediction markets traded $410 billion so far in 2026 across 2.6 billion trades.
- ✓ The CFTC is distinguishing prediction-market event contracts from traditional sportsbook wagers.
What changed
A federal appeals court has ruled that states can regulate prediction markets as gambling, adding to the legal uncertainty around the issue.
Live updates
-
US appeals court rules states can regulate prediction markets as gambling
A federal appeals court has ruled that states can regulate prediction markets as gambling, in a legal battle involving Kalshi and New Jersey regulators. The National Football League supports this regulation, arguing that sports prediction contracts are effectively gambling and should be overseen by states to prevent consumer harm. Conflicting judicial actions have created uncertainty around prediction markets.
Why it matters
The regulation of prediction markets is a contentious issue, with different courts issuing conflicting rulings. The outcome will impact the operation of prediction market platforms and the integrity of sports. States are seeking to ensure consumer protection and prevent potential harm to game integrity. The case may ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court.
What is confirmed
- The NFL has filed an amicus brief supporting New Jersey regulators in a legal battle against Kalshi, arguing that sports prediction contracts are effectively gambling.
- US appeals courts have issued conflicting rulings on the regulation of prediction markets.
- Prediction markets traded $410 billion so far in 2026 across 2.6 billion trades.
- The CFTC is distinguishing prediction-market event contracts from traditional sportsbook wagers.
Still unconfirmed
- The NBA's next move on prediction markets is uncertain.
What to watch next
- The Supreme Court's review of the NFL market rules
- The outcome of the legal battle between Kalshi and New Jersey regulators
- The CFTC's ongoing regulatory efforts on prediction markets
confidence 85%Sources used for this update (6)
- www.digitaltoday.co.kr — U.S. pro sports split on prediction markets, NBA move in focus
- frontofficesports.com — NFL Urges Supreme Court to Hear Prediction-Markets Case - Front Office Sports
- www.goal.com — Prediction Market Update 10/09: NFL regulation fight hits the market as Traders Prepare For Week 5 on Pol....
- www.bettingnews.com — CFTC Clarifies Swaps Rules for Prediction Markets & Gambling
- financefeeds.com — Prediction Markets Hit $410 Billion So Far in 2026 as the CFTC and States Clash Over Regulation
- wowo.com — Election Betting Surges Ahead of Midterms as States Challenge Prediction Markets
-
NFL Urges Supreme Court to Classify Prediction Markets as Gambling
The National Football League is urging the Supreme Court to rule that prediction markets are gambling applications, filing an amicus brief supporting New Jersey regulators in a legal battle against Kalshi. The NFL argues that sports prediction contracts are effectively gambling and that states are better positioned to oversee these platforms to prevent consumer harm. Meanwhile, the legal battle sees conflicting judicial actions, as a federal judge in Chicago blocked Illinois from enforcing sports wagering rules against Kalshi while appeals courts remain split on the issue.
Why it matters
The legal dispute centers on whether prediction markets fall under federal oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission as swaps or under state authority as sports betting. States seek to regulate or shut down these platforms using existing gambling statutes to extract fees and protect consumers. The involvement of major sports leagues and dozens of states highlights the high stakes of the regulatory clash.
What is confirmed
- The National Football League argues in an amicus brief that sports prediction contracts are effectively gambling and should face state gambling regulation.
- A federal judge in Chicago blocked Illinois from enforcing its sports wagering license rules and a related criminal provision against Kalshi.
- Judge Martha M. Pacold ruled on October 2 that Illinois cannot enforce several of its gambling laws against Kalshi while the case plays out.
Still unconfirmed
- Forty states are backing the National Football League's Supreme Court prediction market fight.
What to watch next
- Supreme Court decisions regarding whether to review prediction market cases
- Further rulings from federal appeals courts regarding state regulatory authority
confidence 90%Sources used for this update (22)
- en.wikipedia.org — List of states and territories of the United States - Wikipedia
- www.gambling.com — Prediction Markets vs. States: Where Courts Stand Now
- defirate.com — Prediction Markets at the US Supreme Court 'What If:' What Happens If the Supreme Court Passes on Reviews?
- wtop.com — Prediction Market Legality: Where Are Trading Apps Legal in the US?
- www.igamingtoday.com — Kalshi and CFTC Score Court Win as Judge Halts Illinois Prediction Market Rules
- news.bitcoin.com — Kalshi Ends Federal Court Losing Streak With Partial Win Over Illinois
- www.dailywire.com — Inside The Billion-Dollar Battle To Tax Your Predictions - The Daily Wire
- www.vermontpublic.org — 2026 election interviews: Vermont attorney general | Vermont Public
- www.cnbc.com — NFL tells Supreme Court prediction markets are gambling and should be regulated by the states
- simple.wikipedia.org — List of U.S. states - Simple English Wikipedia, the free...
- www.50states.com — 50states.com – States and Capitals
- usasymbol.com — All 50 U.S. States and Their Official Symbols - usasymbol.com
-
CFTC Seeks Swap Definition for Prediction Market Contracts
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is attempting to define prediction market event contracts as swaps, directly disputing state regulator claims that these platforms constitute illegal gambling. The federal agency sent proposed rules and draft regulations to the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs for review. Meanwhile, the regulatory clash intensifies as a Nevada attorney opposes a bid by prediction market Kalshi to delay a Ninth Circuit rehearing based on the ongoing federal rulemaking process.
Why it matters
The dispute centers on regulatory jurisdiction between federal commodity laws and state gambling statutes as prediction platforms expand into mainstream applications like sports wagering and elections. A leader of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints warned that the proliferation of online prediction markets and sports betting fosters greed among young people. Concurrently, Ohio Governor DeWine stated that an appeals court ruling confirms prediction markets are illegal gambling subject to state law.
What is confirmed
- The CFTC is seeking to define event contracts as swaps as it disputes state regulators claims that some prediction markets fall under state gambling laws.
- The CFTC has sent proposed rules and draft regulations on prediction market event contracts, including a broader swap definition, to the White House OIRA for review.
- A leader of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints stated that an explosion in online prediction markets and sports betting is fostering greed among young people.
- Nevada opposes Kalshis bid to delay a rehearing by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Still unconfirmed
- Kalshi requested a delay of a Ninth Circuit rehearing due to ongoing CFTC rulemaking.
What to watch next
- White House OIRA review of the proposed CFTC prediction market event contract rules
- Decisions from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit regarding Kalshi's rehearing bid
confidence 90%Sources used for this update (7)
- www.wcvb.com — Mormon leader decries explosion in sports betting, prediction markets - WCVB
- cointelegraph.com — CFTC Seeks Swap Definition for Prediction Market Contracts
- www.econotimes.com — CFTC Moves to Define Prediction Markets as Swaps - EconoTimes
- www.si.com — Kalshi Promo Code SI60: Exclusive $60 Bonus in September 2026
- insidebitcoins.com — CFTC Sends Proposed Prediction Market Event Contract Rules to White House for Review
- www.well-played.com.au — CFTC sends prediction market rules to the White House for review
- cdcgaming.com — Nevada: Attorney opposes Kalshi’s bid to delay rehearing due to CFTC rulemaking
-
Ohio Governor States Kalshi Prediction Markets Are Illegal Gambling
Ohio Governor DeWine stated that an appeals court ruling confirms prediction markets are illegal gambling and subject to state law enforcement. As prediction markets expand into mainstream public life, platforms like Polymarket are accepting wagers on Canadian mayoral races and apps are offering NBA basketball trading. The mainstreaming of these platforms brings both gambling risks and new sources of political information, raising concerns for public health and democracy. Concurrently, competitor DraftKings faces a proposed class action lawsuit over allegations that artificial intelligence was used to target vulnerable gamblers.
Why it matters
The recent court decision allows Ohio and Tennessee to enforce state gambling regulations against prediction platforms like Kalshi, deepening a regulatory split over financial swaps. Prediction markets now intersect with both sports betting and local political elections across North America. Increased platform oversight remains a central debate as these services scale rapidly.
What is confirmed
- Ohio Governor DeWine stated that an appeals court ruling means prediction markets are illegal gambling and state law will be enforced.
- Prediction markets are entering mainstream public life by introducing gambling risks alongside new sources of political information.
Still unconfirmed
- DraftKings faces a proposed class action lawsuit after allegedly using artificial intelligence to target vulnerable gamblers.
- Bitget was hacked for $387M, drawing scrutiny toward THORChain.
- Polymarket is accepting wagers on the next mayors of London, Toronto, and Windsor.
What to watch next
- Supreme Court review of the prediction market regulatory dispute
- Enforcement actions by Ohio and Tennessee against Kalshi
- Developments in the class action lawsuit against DraftKings
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (6)
- www.statenews.org — Kalshi is illegal gambling and Ohio will enforce state law following ruling, says DeWine
- theconversation.com — Prediction markets are going mainstream. What does that mean for public health and democracy?
- www.wbaltv.com — DraftKings sued over alleged AI-targeted gambling promotions - WBAL
- cointelegraph.com — THORChain Under Fire Over Bitget, ETH Evolves Beyond Blockchain: Hodler’s Digest
- lfpress.com — Vanderhoeven: Prediction markets are arriving in Canadian politics, like it or not
- www.covers.com — NBA Prediction Market Sites: Best Apps for Basketball Trading in 2026
-
Federal Appeals Court Rules States Can Regulate Prediction Markets
A second federal appeals court ruled that sports event contracts offered by Kalshi do not qualify as federally regulated swaps. The unanimous panel from the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati decided that Ohio and Tennessee can enforce state gambling regulations on the platform. This legal defeat deepens an existing split over the regulatory classification of prediction markets. Legal analysts indicate the dispute is likely heading toward the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, competitor Polymarket introduced new deposit limits and addiction resources amid growing calls for increased platform oversight.
Why it matters
The legal conflict centers on whether event contracts fall under federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission jurisdiction or state-level gambling oversight. A second appeals court ruling against Kalshi strengthens the position of state regulators seeking to enforce local gambling laws on prediction platforms. Critics argue that voluntary measures introduced by platforms like Polymarket are insufficient, raising the pressure for formal regulatory frameworks.
What is confirmed
- A federal appeals court ruled that sports event contracts offered by Kalshi are not swaps.
- Ohio and Tennessee can regulate sports-related event contracts under state gambling laws.
- The legal battle deepens a split that could eventually reach the Supreme Court.
Still unconfirmed
- Legal analysts indicate the dispute is heading toward the Supreme Court.
What to watch next
- Any formal appeal or petition filed with the United States Supreme Court regarding the jurisdictional dispute.
- Additional state regulatory enforcement actions against prediction market platforms.
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (4)
- www.pymnts.com — PYMNTS | Kalshi’s Sports Bets Hit Another Legal Wall
- finance.yahoo.com — Kalshi Loses Major Legal Battle as Appeals Court Says Ohio ...
- www.10news.com — Polymarket is introducing sportsbook-style safeguards - ABC 10News San Diego
- cointelegraph.com — Kalshi loses appeal in court
-
US Appeals Court Rules States Can Regulate Kalshi Prediction Markets
A federal appeals court decided that states maintain the authority to regulate prediction markets using local gambling laws. The unanimous panel from the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati ruled against the prediction markets operator Kalshi on Friday. Judges determined that sports-related event contracts do not qualify as federally regulated swaps under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. This ruling allows Ohio and Tennessee to enforce state gambling regulations on the platform. Legal analysts indicate the dispute is heading toward the Supreme Court.
Why it matters
Federal appeals courts have varied on the regulation of prediction markets, creating conflicting oversight frameworks across different jurisdictions. The latest decision by the 6th Circuit increases compliance risks for fintech platforms offering event-based contracts. This legal divide deepens the split among federal courts regarding whether state regulators or federal agencies maintain authority over these financial products.
What is confirmed
- A US appeals court on Friday ruled against the prediction markets operator Kalshi, saying Ohio and Tennessee can regulate its event contracts under their gambling laws.
- The decision by the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati determined that prediction markets sports-related events contracts are not swaps.
- US appeals courts have varied on the regulation of prediction markets.
Still unconfirmed
- Kalshi's defiance of state gambling laws is heading to the Supreme Court.
What to watch next
- Any official petitions or appeals filed to bring the Kalshi regulation dispute before the US Supreme Court.
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (5)
- arstechnica.com — Kalshi loses again as judges rule prediction markets must obey gambling laws
- www.aljazeera.com — US court rules against Kalshi, says states can regulate ...
- www.coindesk.com — Another appeals court rules against prediction market ...
- stluciachronicle.com — US court rules against Kalshi, says states can regulate prediction markets - St. Lucia Chronicle – Dail....
- www.taylorvilledailynews.com — US appeals court rules against Kalshi, says states can regulate prediction markets – Taylorville Daily ....
-
US Court Rules States Can Regulate Prediction Markets
A federal appeals court decided that Ohio and Tennessee can regulate Kalshi event contracts using state gambling laws. A unanimous three-judge panel at the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals rejected arguments that the platform's sports contracts qualify as federally regulated swaps under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The decision increases compliance risks for fintech platforms and widens a legal divide among federal courts regarding state oversight of prediction markets. Legal analysts indicate the dispute is heading toward the Supreme Court.
Why it matters
The ruling marks the second time in less than a month that an appeals court supported state authority to regulate sports-related event contracts. This decision builds on a prior legal victory for Nevada allowing similar state-level gambling regulations. The ongoing litigation centers on whether federal commodity laws preempt state-level oversight of financial prediction products.
What is confirmed
- The 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Ohio and Tennessee can regulate Kalshi event contracts under state gambling laws.
- A unanimous three-judge panel decided that Kalshi failed to show its sports contracts are swaps regulated exclusively by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
- The decision deepens a circuit split among federal appeals courts regarding state oversight of prediction markets.
Still unconfirmed
- The legal battle is pushing the fight straight toward the Supreme Court.
What to watch next
- Any formal appeal petition or filings submitted to the US Supreme Court
- Potential responses from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission regarding federal preemption
- Developments in New York's Polymarket lawsuit concerning the same federal-versus-state battle
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (7)
- economictimes.indiatimes.com — US appeals court rules against Kalshi, says states can regulate prediction markets
- www.whalesbook.com — US Court Rules States Can Regulate Prediction Markets
- thecurrencyanalytics.com — Kalshi’s Future Hangs in Balance as 6th Circuit Rules Against Its Gambling Defense
- www.cointribune.com — Prediction Markets: Kalshi Loses A Major Battle Over Its Sports Contracts
- usaherald.com — Sixth Circuit Guts Kalshi’s Federal Shield, Rules Sports Bets Are Just Bets
- www.cnbc.com — Appeals court rules states can regulate sports prediction markets
- www.channelnewsasia.com — US appeals court rules against Kalshi, says states can regulate prediction markets
-
Sixth Circuit rules Ohio and Tennessee can regulate Kalshi under gambling laws
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that Ohio and Tennessee have the authority to regulate Kalshi's event contracts using state gambling laws. The states argued Kalshi violated these laws by offering sporting event contracts without a license. This decision expands the legal pressure on the prediction market operator, following a previous ruling that allowed Nevada to apply similar regulations. The ruling increases the legal divide among federal appeals courts regarding how states can oversee prediction markets.
Why it matters
Prediction markets allow users to trade contracts based on the outcome of future events. Kalshi has faced multiple state-level challenges to its business model, including cease-and-desist orders in Missouri. These legal battles determine if such platforms are financial exchanges or illegal gambling operations.
What is confirmed
- The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Ohio and Tennessee can regulate Kalshi's event contracts under gambling laws.
- Ohio and Tennessee argued Kalshi offered sporting event contracts without a license.
- The court issued its ruling on Friday, September 25, 2026.
Still unconfirmed
- The ruling deepens a divide among federal appeals courts on state regulation of prediction markets.
What to watch next
- Further appeals by Kalshi to higher courts
- Potential regulatory actions by other states following the Sixth Circuit precedent
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (4)
- nypost.com — Kalshi subject to state gambling laws, appeals court finds — major blow to prediction market giant
- www.unionleader.com — Appeals court rules against Kalshi, says states can regulate prediction markets
- www.courthousenews.com — Sixth Circuit says states can regulate Kalshi's prediction markets
- www.covers.com — Sixth Circuit Court Rules Against Kalshi, in Favor of Ohio, Tennessee
-
Ninth Circuit ruling permits state regulation of prediction markets
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals determined that Nevada can apply state gambling laws to Kalshi prediction markets. This ruling resolves a jurisdictional dispute over whether contracts based on sports events are gambling. While Kalshi maintains partnerships with Major League Baseball teams including the Padres and Dodgers, the court decision grants states the authority to regulate such platforms. This follows a separate crackdown in Missouri, where Attorney General Catherine Hanaway sent cease-and-desist letters to six exchanges.
Why it matters
Prediction markets function as trading platforms for outcomes in categories such as war, politics, economics, culture, and sports. Proponents view these markets as forecasting tools, though critics argue they promote speculation and the financialization of uncertainty.
What is confirmed
- The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Nevada may enforce state gambling laws against Kalshi prediction markets.
- Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway issued cease-and-desist letters to six prediction market exchanges.
- Prediction markets allow users to trade or bet on the outcomes of real-world events.
What to watch next
- Further legal challenges by Kalshi against state gambling enforcement
- Additional state attorneys general issuing cease-and-desist orders to exchanges
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (2)
- www.scoop.co.nz — What Are Prediction Markets—and Can They Really Predict The Future?
- asiatimes.com — Can prediction markets create the future they predict?
-
Ninth Circuit rules states can enforce gambling laws against Kalshi
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Nevada may enforce state gambling laws against Kalshi prediction markets. This decision follows a period of jurisdictional conflict between state and federal authorities over whether sports event contracts constitute gambling. While Kalshi has expanded its reach through partnerships with Major League Baseball teams like the Dodgers and Padres, the ruling empowers states to regulate these platforms. Simultaneously, Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway has issued cease-and-desist letters to six prediction market exchanges as part of a state-level crackdown.
Why it matters
The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing whether the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has exclusive authority over these markets. New Jersey, Robinhood, and Crypto.com have requested a resolution to determine if platforms can operate across all 50 states without local licenses. Brad Lipton argues that federal rules provide weaker consumer protections regarding odds and addiction than state laws.
What is confirmed
- The Ninth Circuit ruled Nevada can enforce gambling laws against Kalshi's prediction markets.
- Kalshi partnered in August with the Dodgers, the Padres, and two other baseball teams.
Still unconfirmed
- Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway ordered cease-and-desist letters for six prediction market exchanges.
What to watch next
- Supreme Court ruling on the jurisdictional conflict between the CFTC and state authorities
- Further cease-and-desist actions from state attorneys general against prediction markets
confidence 90%Sources used for this update (5)
- newrepublic.com — How Do You Stop Election Tampering Before It Happens?
- cryptobriefing.com — DraftKings shares rise despite regulatory blow to prediction markets
- www.kpbs.org — Federal Court rules Padres partner offers illegal gambling
- www.thelines.com — Six Prediction Markets Targeted in Missouri Crackdown
- rooseveltinstitute.org — How the Federal Rules for Prediction Markets Fall Short of State-Level Gambling Laws
-
Robinhood, Crypto.com and New Jersey petition Supreme Court over prediction markets
The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to resolve whether the Commodity Futures Trading Commission holds exclusive authority over sports event contracts or if states can regulate them as gambling. New Jersey petitioned the court on Sept. 2 to determine if Kalshi can legally offer sports betting across all 50 states without obtaining state licenses. Robinhood and Crypto.com have also requested the court settle the jurisdictional conflict between federal and state authorities.
Why it matters
A Ninth Circuit panel previously ruled that Kalshi's sports contracts constitute betting under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. This established a precedent for state and tribal authorities to treat prediction markets as gambling rather than financial speculation.
Still unconfirmed
- New Jersey petitioned the Supreme Court on Sept. 2 regarding Kalshi's legal ability to offer sports betting in all 50 states without state licenses.
- Robinhood and Crypto.com asked the Supreme Court to clarify if the CFTC holds exclusive authority over sports event contracts.
What to watch next
- Supreme Court decision on whether to grant certiorari for the petitions
- CFTC response to the claims of exclusive authority
confidence 90%Sources used for this update (2)
- www.yogonet.com — Crypto.com, Robinhood ask Supreme Court to settle federal-state fight over sports event contracts
- startupfortune.com — New Jersey Asks Supreme Court to Decide if Kalshi's Sports Betting Is Legal
-
Ninth Circuit rules Kalshi sports contracts are bets under IGRA
A Ninth Circuit panel ruled that purchasing sports contracts on Kalshi constitutes betting under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. This decision sides with two California tribes and restricts Kalshi's operations on tribal lands. The ruling reinforces the ability of state and tribal authorities to regulate prediction markets as gambling rather than financial speculation. This legal setback for Kalshi arrives as the platform continues to challenge broader jurisdictional restrictions on its event contracts.
Why it matters
Prediction markets allow users to trade on the outcome of elections and sports. A conflict exists between platform operators who claim these are financial instruments and regulators who view them as gambling. This tension is heightened by a lack of federal legislative clarity via the CLARITY Act.
What is confirmed
- A Ninth Circuit panel ruled that buying a Kalshi sports contract is placing a bet under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
- The Ninth Circuit ruling sides with two California tribes.
What to watch next
- Supreme Court review of prediction market jurisdictional clashes
- Further legal challenges by Kalshi against state-level gambling regulations
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (2)
- financefeeds.com — Appeals Court Blocks Kalshi Sports Contracts on California Tribal Lands
- ftw.usatoday.com — Is Kalshi Legal in Texas? Yes — Use Code SBWIRE55 to Start Trading Today (September 2026)
-
States Retain Authority Over Prediction Markets as Federal Rulings Stall
A federal appeals court ruling allows states to regulate prediction markets as gambling, intensifying jurisdictional clashes between state regulators and federal authorities. These platforms let users trade event contracts on sports and elections, creating tension over whether the activity constitutes traditional gambling or distinct financial speculation. Conflicting circuit rulings and the Senate's failure to advance the CLARITY Act leave the legal standing of these markets uncertain. Meanwhile, platform operators like Kalshi pursue rehearings that could influence the timeline for a potential Supreme Court review.
Why it matters
States and the federal government are currently clashing over whether prediction market event contracts amount to unregulated gambling. The Senate failed cloture on the CLARITY Act by a 49-50 vote, stalling crypto and prediction market regulations until after the November midterms. Conflicting circuit rulings have left sports prediction markets in legal limbo.
What is confirmed
- States and the federal government are clashing over whether prediction market event contracts amount to unregulated gambling.
- The Senate failed cloture on the CLARITY Act 49-50, stalling prediction market regulation.
Still unconfirmed
- Kalshi's rehearing bid could delay a Supreme Court review.
- Prediction market regulation is stalled until after the November midterms.
What to watch next
- Resolution of Kalshi's rehearing bid in the Ninth Circuit
- Potential Supreme Court review of prediction market regulations
- Post-midterm legislative action on the CLARITY Act
confidence 90%Sources used for this update (4)
- www.al.com — Best prediction markets: Top US apps and sites for September 2026
- www.covers.com — Ninth Circuit Rehearing Could Shape Prediction Market Supreme Court Timeline
- insidebitcoins.com — Senate Fails Cloture on CLARITY Act 49-50, Stalling Prediction-Market Rules
- www.governing.com — States’ Uprising Against Prediction Markets
-
Manhattan Court Weighs New York Prediction Market Restrictions
A New York federal court is currently deciding whether to block the state's crackdown on prediction markets. This legal challenge involves the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and a market operator seeking to halt state enforcement. These platforms allow users to trade contracts that pay fixed sums based on the outcome of elections or sports matches. The ruling will influence whether such speculation is treated as traditional gambling or a distinct financial activity, impacting how states apply gambling taxes and licensing requirements.
Why it matters
The legal status of prediction markets remains contested as they grow in popularity before the November midterms. A broader conflict persists between federal oversight and the authority of states like New Jersey and Missouri to regulate these platforms as unlicensed casinos.
What is confirmed
- Prediction markets allow users to speculate on the outcomes of elections or sports matches.
- Users trade contracts in these markets that pay a fixed sum if a specific event happens.
What to watch next
- The Manhattan federal court ruling on New York's crackdown
- The Supreme Court decision on state authority to regulate markets as gambling
confidence 90%Sources used for this update (4)
- www.law.com — Supreme Court Blocks New GOP Congressional Map in Missouri
- www.law.com — ‘A Toss-Up?’: Manhattan Federal Court Weighs NY's Prediction Market Crackdown
- theconversation.com — When a bet may not be gambling ‑ the puzzle of prediction markets
- www.miragenews.com — Prediction Markets: Betting or Not?
-
Supreme Court reviews state authority to regulate prediction markets
The U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing whether states can regulate prediction markets as gambling platforms. This legal battle pits federal control against state authority over sports betting and unlicensed casino operations. The case arrives as trading on these platforms increases ahead of the November midterms. New Jersey and Missouri have already argued that these markets must follow the same taxes and regulations as licensed sportsbooks. The court's decision will determine if platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket must comply with individual state gambling laws.
Why it matters
A circuit split regarding state authority over prediction markets prompted the legal challenge. Platforms have already faced restrictions, such as Kalshi limiting wagers on the New Jersey lawsuit due to potential fines from Michigan.
What is confirmed
- The U.S. Supreme Court is weighing the regulation of prediction markets.
- States are attempting to outlaw prediction platforms by classifying them as unlicensed casinos.
Still unconfirmed
- The Supreme Court is monitoring the situation regarding the regulation of Polymarket and Kalshi.
What to watch next
- The Supreme Court ruling on state versus federal control of prediction markets
- The impact of prediction market trading on the November midterm election results
confidence 90%Sources used for this update (5)
- en.cryptonomist.ch — Supreme Court Weighs Prediction Markets Regulation as States Clash With Kalshi
- mashable.com — Polymarket and Kalshi face possible regulation as Supreme Court 'monitors the situation'
- apnews.com — 2026’s elections could test how heavy trading on prediction markets affects races and results
- www.scotusblog.com — One very busy weekend
- www.law.com — Election Disputes Descend on Supreme Court Ahead of Midterms
-
States Can Regulate Prediction Markets as Gambling, Appeals Court Rules
New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport asked the U.S. Supreme Court to determine whether federally regulated prediction platforms can offer sports wagering without complying with state gambling laws. This legal action follows a circuit split regarding state authority over these markets. Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway also contends that prediction markets ought to face the identical regulations and taxes as licensed sportsbooks. Meanwhile, Kalshi restricted users from placing wagers on the outcome of the New Jersey lawsuit after facing threats of daily fines from Michigan officials.
Why it matters
The dispute centers on whether federal oversight preempts state authority over sports-based prediction contracts offered by platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket. Companies such as STX are also planning to expand into the United States prediction market business, utilizing prior iGaming experience. The ongoing friction has created a clear circuit split, prompting state officials to seek intervention from the highest court.
What is confirmed
- New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport asked the U.S. Supreme Court to determine if federally regulated prediction markets can offer sports betting nationwide without following state gambling laws.
- Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway argues that prediction markets should face the same taxes and regulations as licensed sportsbooks.
- Kalshi has blocked users from wagering on the outcome of the New Jersey lawsuit amid threats of daily fines from Michigan.
Still unconfirmed
- STX plans to use its Ontario iGaming experience as a springboard into the U.S. prediction market business.
What to watch next
- A decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on whether to hear the New Jersey challenge.
- Further enforcement actions or daily fine threats from state regulators such as Michigan.
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (6)
- www.cbssports.com — NFL prediction markets 2026: Learn more about Kalshi, Polymarket, others ahead of 2026 NFL season
- TribLIVE.com — Could prediction market bets on Pa. politics lead to corruption?
- www.covers.com — STX’s Springboard: Ontario iGaming Experience Fuels US Prediction Market Push
- www.financemagnates.com — Federal Courts Now Disagree on Kalshi’s Sports Contracts. New Jersey Wants the Supreme Court to Settle the Fight
- www.law.com — Supreme Court Sides With GOP Over Favorable TV Ad Rates Ahead of Midterms
- www.law.com — Supreme Court's Inconsistent Use of Obscure Tool Draws Scrutiny
-
New Jersey petitions Supreme Court over Kalshi sports betting legality
New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to determine if federally regulated prediction markets like Kalshi can offer sports betting nationwide without following state gambling laws. This legal challenge follows a circuit split regarding whether states can regulate these markets as gambling. While Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway also argues that prediction markets should face the same taxes and regulations as licensed sportsbooks, Kalshi has blocked users from wagering on the outcome of the New Jersey lawsuit amid threats of daily fines from Michigan.
Why it matters
Prediction markets allow users to trade on the outcome of future events. The resolution of this case will decide if these platforms can bypass state-level licensing and tax requirements.
What is confirmed
- New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to decide if prediction markets can bypass state gambling laws.
- Kalshi has blocked users from betting on the outcome of the New Jersey lawsuit.
- A circuit split has left the legal status of the 22 billion dollar platform Kalshi unresolved.
Still unconfirmed
- Michigan is threatening Kalshi with a 500,000 dollar daily fine.
- An insurance company placed bets on Kalshi regarding LSU's season that align with Lane Kiffin's contract bonuses.
What to watch next
- Supreme Court decision on whether to hear the New Jersey petition
- Further regulatory actions from the Michigan government against Kalshi
confidence 90%Sources used for this update (7)
- www.lawcommentary.com — Supreme Court Asked to Decide Whether Kalshi Can Bypass State Sports Betting Laws
- njbia.org — NJ AG Asks US Supreme Court to Stop Kalshi from Evading State Gambling Laws
- startupfortune.com — Crypto Exchange Gate Launches a White-Label Builder for Prediction Markets
- startupfortune.com — New Jersey Asks the Supreme Court to Decide Kalshi's Sports Betting Fate
- www.nytimes.com — An insurance company bet on LSU to win big. Is it tied to Lane Kiffin’s bonus?
- finance.yahoo.com — Missouri AG: Prediction Markets Should Follow Same Rules as Sportsbooks
- thecurrencyanalytics.com — Kalshi Halts Betting on Its Supreme Court Fate Amid $500K Fine Threat from Michigan
-
New Jersey seeks Supreme Court review of prediction market regulations
New Jersey has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether states or federal regulators have oversight authority over prediction markets, following a federal appeals court ruling allowing states to regulate them as gambling. The case could determine how prediction markets are licensed and taxed. This development comes as the NFL season begins and prediction market platforms like Kalshi have entered partnerships with several teams.
Why it matters
The federal appeals court ruling permitting state oversight of prediction markets was a setback for Kalshi, which had argued that federal commodities law preempts state regulation. Prediction markets have been growing in popularity, particularly those related to sports events. The Supreme Court's potential involvement could have far-reaching implications for the industry.
What is confirmed
- New Jersey has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to settle a legal dispute over the regulation of prediction markets.
- A federal appeals court ruled that states can regulate prediction markets as gambling.
- The case could decide how prediction markets are licensed and taxed.
- Kalshi had argued that federal commodities law preempts state oversight of prediction markets.
What to watch next
- The U.S. Supreme Court's decision on whether to review the case
- Any potential rulings from the Supreme Court on the regulation of prediction markets
- The impact of the case on the sports prediction market industry
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (5)
- thecurrencyanalytics.com — New Jersey Urges Supreme Court to Clarify Regulation of Prediction Markets
- cdcgaming.com — New Jersey asks U.S. Supreme Court to decide who regulates prediction markets
- www.law.com — 'Profoundly Wrong': New Jersey Asks Supreme Court to Review Kalshi's Win Over State Gambling Rules
- finance.yahoo.com — New Jersey Seeks Supreme Court Review of Sports Prediction Market Case
- jerseyvindicator.org — New Jersey petitions Supreme Court to block Kalshi from sidestepping state gambling laws
-
Federal appeals court rules states can regulate prediction markets as gambling
A federal appeals court has ruled that states can regulate prediction markets as gambling, permitting Nevada gaming regulators to oversee the platform. The decision rejects Kalshi's claim that federal commodities law preempts state oversight. This ruling affects how prediction markets are licensed and taxed. The outcome arrives as the NFL season begins and Kalshi has entered brand partnerships with several teams.
Why it matters
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' unanimous decision sets a precedent for state regulation of prediction markets. This industry has seen significant investor interest and valuations. The ruling may lead to a Supreme Court decision that could reshape the multibillion-dollar industry. Conflicting court rulings have created competing interpretations of the law.
What is confirmed
- The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Kalshi's sports contracts constitute sports betting despite being offered through a federally regulated exchange.
- The ruling permits Nevada gaming regulators to oversee the Kalshi platform.
- The decision rejects Kalshi's claim that federal commodities law preempts state oversight.
- Conflicting court rulings have put the industry under competing interpretations of the law.
- The outcome may set up a fight at the Supreme Court.
Still unconfirmed
- Bill Simmons was not aware of proxy betting rules when he got his daughter’s boyfriend to make wagers for him in Massachusetts.
What to watch next
- A potential Supreme Court decision on prediction market regulation
- The impact of the ruling on Kalshi's brand partnerships with sports teams
- Other states' responses to the Nevada ruling
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (5)
- www.baltimoresun.com — Conflicting court rulings deepen fight over how prediction markets are regulated
- www.covers.com — Other States Seize on Nevada’s Prediction Market Triumph
- finance.yahoo.com — Kalshi Says It's a Prediction Market. The 9th Circuit Says It's Gambling.
- coingeek.com — Kalshi, Polymarket raise funds, US courts lower the boom
- www.covers.com — Bill Simmons on Proxy Betting Foofaraw: 'Lesson Learned'
-
Ninth Circuit Court Rules Kalshi Sports Markets Are Sports Betting
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Kalshi's sports contracts constitute sports betting despite being offered through a federally regulated exchange. This unanimous decision permits Nevada gaming regulators to oversee the platform and rejects Kalshi's claim that federal commodities law preempts state oversight. The ruling establishes that states can regulate prediction markets as gambling, which affects how these platforms are licensed and taxed. This legal outcome arrives as the NFL season begins and Kalshi has entered brand partnerships with the San Diego Padres and three other teams.
Why it matters
Prediction markets operate in a gray area between financial derivatives and gambling. This ruling creates a jurisdictional conflict between federal commodity laws and state gaming regulations. The outcome determines whether these platforms are treated as financial exchanges or betting houses.
What is confirmed
- The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Kalshi's sports contracts amount to sports betting.
- The court decision allows Nevada gaming regulators to oversee Kalshi's platform.
- Kalshi entered a brand partnership with the San Diego Padres and three other teams.
Still unconfirmed
- The current legal conflict is likely to result in a clash at the Supreme Court.
- The ruling may impact how people bet on the upcoming NFL season.
What to watch next
- Supreme Court filings or appeals regarding federal preemption of state gambling laws
- Action by Nevada gaming regulators to enforce licensing requirements on Kalshi
confidence 90%Sources used for this update (5)
- www.techspot.com — A federal court just ruled Kalshi's sports markets are basically sports betting
- ftw.usatoday.com — Best Prediction Markets: How They Work & How to Trade (September 2026)
- newschannel9.com — Conflicting court rulings deepen fight over how prediction markets are regulated
- voiceofsandiego.org — Federal Court Rules Padres Partner Offers Illegal Gambling
- www.southshorepress.com — Prediction Markets Take Major Hit
-
Federal appeals court affirms state authority to regulate prediction markets as gambling
A federal appeals court ruled on August 28 that states may regulate prediction markets as gambling, rejecting Kalshi's argument that federal commodities law preempts state oversight of sports-event contracts. The unanimous decision allows Nevada gaming regulators to oversee Kalshi's platform and prevents the company from blocking such regulation. This ruling creates a conflict between federal and state jurisdictions over whether these platforms offer financial products or gambling services, potentially impacting how the industry is taxed and licensed.
Why it matters
Prediction platforms currently operate under federal commodity regulators rather than state gaming boards, allowing them to avoid gambling taxes. This case centers on whether sports-related event contracts are financial swaps or bets. A prior Third Circuit decision contradicts this ruling, increasing the likelihood of a Supreme Court review.
What is confirmed
- A federal appeals court ruled on August 28 that states can regulate prediction markets as gambling.
- The court found Kalshi did not show that Nevada's regulation of sports-event contracts was likely preempted by federal commodities law.
- The ruling was unanimous.
- The decision allows Nevada gaming regulators to oversee the Kalshi platform.
Still unconfirmed
- Prediction platforms avoid gambling taxes because they are licensed by a federal commodity regulator instead of state boards.
What to watch next
- Supreme Court petition to resolve the circuit split between the Third and Ninth Circuits.
- Arizona's potential revival of previous prosecutions against prediction market operators.
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (6)
- www.cnn.com — ‘This is an all-out war’: Inside the casino industry’s fight to stop prediction markets
- www.wqow.com — States can regulate prediction markets as gambling, federal appeals court rules
- www.tekedia.com — Appeals Court Rules Nevada Can Regulate Kalshi, Deepening Legal Fight Over Prediction Markets
- cryptonews.net — Kalshi ruling puts CFTC prediction rules at risk
- www.scotusblog.com — Updates on the new birthright citizenship executive order and mail-in ballots
- www.financialadvisoriq.com — Court Rules Kalshi Can't Block Nevada's Regulation of Prediction Markets
-
Ninth Circuit rules states can regulate prediction markets as gambling
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 3-0 that states possess the authority to regulate prediction markets as gambling. The court specifically found that sports-related event contracts are not "swaps," rejecting claims by platform operator Kalshi that such trades fall outside state oversight. This decision prevents Kalshi from restarting trading on sports and election events in Nevada and potentially enables Arizona to revive previous prosecutions. The ruling creates a circuit split with a Third Circuit decision, signaling a likely legal battle at the Supreme Court.
Why it matters
Prediction markets allow users to bet on the outcomes of real-world events. Kalshi argued its contracts were financial swaps rather than gambling to avoid state-level restrictions. This legal distinction determines whether these platforms operate under federal commodity laws or state gambling statutes.
What is confirmed
- The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that states can regulate prediction markets as gambling.
- The court ruled that sports-related event contracts are not swaps.
- The decision prevents Kalshi from restarting trading on sports and election events in Nevada.
- The 3-0 ruling creates a circuit split with a Third Circuit decision from April.
Still unconfirmed
- The ruling may revive a prosecution in Arizona.
- The CFTC is signaling a battle at the Supreme Court.
What to watch next
- A Supreme Court petition or ruling to resolve the circuit split between the Third and Ninth Circuits.
- Further legal actions by Arizona regarding prediction market prosecutions.
confidence 100%Sources used for this update (16)
- CNN — States can regulate prediction markets as gambling, federal appeals court rules
- Reuters — Kalshi cannot block Nevada oversight of prediction markets, US appeals court rules
- CNBC — U.S. appeals court rules against prediction markets, sets up likely fight at Supreme Court
- Yahoo — Federal appeals court rules that states can regulate betting markets
- qz.com — Ninth Circuit rules states can regulate prediction markets as gambling
- SFGATE — Federal court deals big blow to prediction markets like Kalshi
- Ars Technica — Court rules Kalshi sports bets aren’t “swaps,” just gambling with a different name
- Axios — Ninth Circuit backs state regulation for online prediction market sports wagers
- The New York Times — Prediction Markets Should Be Regulated as Gambling, Appeals Court Says
- PYMNTS.com — CFTC Signals Supreme Court Battle After Nevada Wins Prediction Markets Case
- Arizona Mirror — 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight, potentially reviving Arizona's prosecution
- finance.yahoo.com — Ninth Circuit rules states can regulate prediction markets as gambling
Community Sentiment: How do you assess this situation?
Voice your perspective · Real-time aggregated sentiment from the Live Feeds community