TL;DR
- Kalshi, a federally regulated derivatives exchange, filed a lawsuit against New York over its sports prediction markets, claiming federal law preempts state gambling restrictions.
- The dispute began after the state issued a cease-and-desist order. Kalshi argues that restricting its contracts harms users, investors, and business partners while undermining federally authorized derivatives markets.
- The case could shape how prediction markets operate across U.S. states.
Kalshi, a New York-based derivatives exchange, has initiated legal action against the state’s regulators to defend its sports prediction markets. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York under the title KalshiEX LLC v. Robert Williams, challenges efforts by the New York State Gaming Commission to shut down the platform’s event contracts. These contracts allow users to speculate on sports outcomes, ranging from NCAA tournament results to the U.S. Open Golf Championship. The company emphasizes that maintaining nationwide access ensures broader market participation and stronger liquidity across its platform.
Federal Authority Clashes With State Gambling Oversight
Kalshi maintains that its operations fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which designated it a contract market in 2020. The company asserts that federal oversight preempts state-level gambling restrictions, citing the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Under federal law, Kalshi must meet strict requirements, including robust recordkeeping, liquidity standards, and anti-manipulation safeguards, all designed for nationally accessible trading.
New York regulators counter that sports-based contracts violate state Penal Law and Racing Law, asserting that the platform requires a state gaming license to operate. The commission has warned Kalshi of potential civil and criminal penalties unless it ceases offering these contracts to state residents. The platform’s leadership insists that innovative financial instruments like these should operate consistently under federal rules to avoid regulatory fragmentation and unnecessary uncertainty.
Prediction Market’s Existential Threat
Kalshi warns that state-by-state restrictions could threaten its core business model. Blocking access to federally approved instruments would not only impose economic and reputational harm but also force the company to develop complex technological solutions to restrict specific users, potentially undermining regulatory compliance. Similar legal battles have surfaced in New Jersey and Nevada, where federal rulings favoring Kalshi were ignored, raising broader questions about the future of prediction markets in the U.S.
The dispute also highlights New York’s growing scrutiny of emerging financial technologies. Recent proposals include taxing digital asset transactions and broad definitions of digital assets, reflecting an aggressive state-level approach that diverges from global standards.
