A US appeals court ruled Friday that Ohio and Tennessee can regulate Kalshi’s so-called event contracts under gambling laws, dealing the prediction market giant one of its biggest legal blows yet.
The ruling by the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals – which focused on sports bets, Kalshi’s main cash cow – said the company has failed to demonstrate that its event contracts are “swaps” that should be regulated exclusively by the federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
The question of whether state law applies to Kalshi and other prediction market operators has been a hotly contested issue, with the companies enjoying a light regulatory touch from the CFTC to date.
The ruling could help usher in a tougher era for the rapidly growing businesses in forcing them to comply with the same state and gaming regulators who oversee casinos and lottos throughout the country.
The decision could also pave the way for prediction market sports betting to be banned outright in huge markets – like California – that don’t allow sports betting.
The ruling in favor of plaintiffs Ohio and Tennessee is the latest decision in a heated legal saga in which Kalshi has been battling more than a dozen state lawsuits. Kalshi has also been locked in a bitter feud with Native American tribes that have slapped the New York startup with their own trio of lawsuits to remove Kalshi from tribal land, as The Post reported.
Kalshi says its wagers are financial instruments that it calls “event contracts” and “swaps,” and thus fall under the regulatory umbrella of the CFTC. States and tribes argue that Kalshi’s event contracts – in which users either take a “yes” or “no” position on a particular outcome – are indistinguishable from gambling.
“We hold that Kalshi has not shown that its sports-event contracts satisfy the statutory definition of a “swap” so as to fall within the scope of the CFTC’s ‘exclusive jurisdiction,’” stated the ruling from the 6th Circuit court, which is based in Ohio.
The ruling added that “even assuming that Kalshi’s sports-event contracts are swaps, we alternatively hold that the Commodities Exchange Act neither expressly nor impliedly preempts Ohio’s or Tennessee’s gambling laws.”
Kathryn Rand, a visiting professor at the University of Nevada Las Vegas’s law school who studies Indian gaming law, told The Post in a recent interview that if judges view prediction market wagers as mirroring gambling – regardless of semantics – that could have huge implications for the companies.
“These judges might be more persuaded by – this quacks like a duck, it looks like a duck, this is obviously a duck, and it ought to be regulated under state law. Period,” she said.
Venture capitalists have continued to pour cash into Kalshi despite the mounting legal threats – the company has raised $2.6 billion in total and has reportedly been in talks for additional financing that could value it at $40 billion.
Investors have maintained they’re optimistic that the company can defeat at least some of the suits and that its bet-on-anything business is a novel concept even if regulators move to crack down on it.
Other venture capitalists have said the Trump administration’s support of prediction markets could mean that by the time a new administration comes in, Kalshi may be so integrated into financial markets – and everyday life for many Americans – that unwinding it would be deeply unpopular.
Kalshi did not immediately answer a request for comment.
