US gaming lawmakers urge Supreme Court to hear Kalshi case

A group of US state lawmakers has asked the Supreme Court to step into the fight between New Jersey regulators and prediction market platform Kalshi. For high-risk operators, the real issue is jurisdiction: if the case goes Kalshi’s way, state-by-state rules on sports-related event contracts could get a lot harder to enforce.

1. On Tuesday, the National Council of Legislators from Gaming States (NCLGS) filed an amicus brief with the US Supreme Court in support of New Jersey’s Attorney General and gaming authorities, who are asking the Court to hear their case against Kalshi. The petition for a writ of certiorari was filed on Sept. 2 and asks the justices to decide whether state authorities or federal agencies have jurisdiction over prediction market companies.
2. In its filing, the NCLGS argued that a ruling for Kalshi would “render states powerless” to regulate sports betting on prediction markets and create “substantial harm and confusion.” The group said gaming-related matters should remain with individual US states, while not addressing the opposing view that event contracts traded on federally regulated markets fall under the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction.
3. The lawmakers also warned that if Kalshi’s self-described “sports betting” activity is found to be outside state regulation, casinos, pari-mutuel operators, and other heavily regulated businesses will try to seek the same treatment. In other words: if one product can move from state oversight to a federal lane, other operators will immediately start testing the edges of the same preemption theory.
4. The Supreme Court petition comes from New Jersey authorities after a decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Kalshi has not filed an official response yet, and the company has until Nov. 9 to submit its brief. After the original filing, a spokesperson told Cointelegraph that Kalshi could not be “regulated by 50 different regulators.”