RESOLVING THE LEDGER
This is one outlet's own report from CBS News — the article as it was filed. Other outlets are covering the same event; open the full story to compare every source side by side.
See the full story · 6 sources
A federal appeals court on Friday rejected Kalshi\u0027s efforts to stop Nevada from regulating speculation on sporting events on its platform, handing states an important win in the battle over which level of government has authority to oversee the rapidly growing prediction-markets business.The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said Kalshi failed to show that the 1936 Commodity Exchange Act, which regulates commodity futures trading, preempts Nevada gambling laws and bars the state from regulating wagers related to sporting events. Those prediction market contracts are not federally regulated "swaps" but rather sports bets, the court said."The substance of the sports event contracts offered on Kalshi\u0027s DCM [designated contract market] is sports gambling, regardless of whether Kalshi calls them swaps," Ryan Nelson, one of the 9th Circuit judges, wrote in the court\u0027s opinion.State and federal turf warStates are locked in an ongoing legal fight with the federal government over which level of government has primary regulatory oversight of prediction markets, which allow users to bet on the outcomes of sports, elections and many other events.\u00a0Roughly 20 states are involved in litigation over prediction markets, and experts say the battle is likely to wind its way to the Supreme Court.A separate decision in April reached a different conclusion than Friday\u0027s decision, with the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, a government agency that regulates derivatives markets, has exclusive control over sports-related event contracts on Kalshi."The 9th Circuit agreed with the 3rd Circuit on a fundamental point: Federal law prevents states from regulating trading on a federally licensed exchange, like Kalshi," Kalshi spokesperson Dani Lever said in an email. "Despite the 9th Circuit\u0027s opinion, we still believe the CFTC regulations, as written, do not prohibit sports contracts, and in any event, the CFTC is working to clarify those regulations. We will be seeking further review."The Nevada Gaming Control Board said the ruling "vindicates what we have been saying all along. This is sports betting and needs to be properly regulated by the state."Dominick Freda, legal director of Better Markets, a nonprofit advocacy organization focused on financial reform, said in an email that the 9th Circuit\u0027s decision is a "decisive win for the rule of law and for every state that has built a regulatory regime to protect its residents from gambling harms."
AIPROPX is an independent multi-source news index — we track, compare, and connect coverage from across the web into one place you won't find anywhere else.