Ninth Circuit rules states may regulate prediction-market platform Kalshi
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a unanimous decision allowing state regulators to oversee Kalshi, a prediction-market platform, challenging the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s exclusive authority.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a 3-0 ruling that permits state authorities to regulate Kalshi, a platform that allows users to trade contracts based on real-world events. The decision challenges the view that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) alone has jurisdiction over such prediction markets.
Kalshi and a similar platform, Polymarket, are currently overseen by the CFTC, which traditionally regulates futures and other derivatives. Both companies have listed Donald Trump Jr. as a strategic advisor. The CFTC, which has authority to classify various products—including cryptocurrency and online sports betting—as commodities, is presently operating with a single commissioner, Michael Selig.
The agency has previously filed lawsuits against nine states and invoked emergency powers to direct Kalshi and related firms to disregard certain court orders. In response, a coalition of state attorneys general has intensified legal actions: 20 states are involved in litigation against one or both prediction-market operators, and 44 attorneys general signed a letter criticizing the CFTC’s rule-making authority.
State officials have cited two primary concerns: the companies’ alleged tax avoidance, estimated at roughly $2 billion annually, and the perception that the platforms function as unregulated gambling venues. Industry competitors in the sports-betting sector have also begun offering similar event-based contracts, intensifying the regulatory debate.