- A bipartisan coalition of 40 AGs filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting New Jersey’s petition for cert that asks the justices to review whether prediction market operator Kalshi can offer sports betting contracts without complying with state gambling laws. The coalition is urging the Supreme Court to resolve growing conflict among federal appeals courts over whether states have the authority to regulate prediction markets that offer contracts resembling sports betting.
- In April, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over Kalshi’s event contracts, limiting states’ ability to enforce their gambling laws against the company. In September, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Sixth Circuit reached differing conclusions, ruling that states may regulate prediction markets when the contracts function as gambling.
- The conflicting rulings have created legal uncertainty for state regulators and raised questions about the extent of states’ authority to oversee prediction market operators.