Recent litigation over whether the Commodity Exchange Act and CFTC regulation preempt state gambling laws for sports event contracts has created the primary driver of trader views. The Third Circuit’s April 2026 ruling favored federal preemption in a Kalshi-related dispute, while the Ninth Circuit heard consolidated arguments on April 16, 2026, in cases involving multiple platforms and Nevada authorities. A circuit split appears possible after the Ninth Circuit decision, expected within 60–120 days, which could prompt certiorari petitions as early as July 2026. Over 30 states have filed amicus briefs emphasizing state authority, underscoring federalism tensions that often attract Supreme Court attention. No sports event contract petition has yet been granted for the 2025–2026 term, keeping near-term resolution odds sensitive to these appellate outcomes and any subsequent filings.
基于Polymarket数据的AI实验性摘要。这不是交易建议，也不影响该市场的结算方式。 · 更新于Speculation That Ninth Circuit May Diverge From Third Circuit on Prediction‑Market Preemption
July 31 rises to 7%2%
Rumors surfaced that the Ninth Circuit expected to issue a decision contrary to the Third Circuit’s pre‑emptive view. Though no opinion was released by the analysis deadline, market participants priced in the possibility of a split, causing a brief rebound in “Yes” odds.
Supreme Court denies certiorari in AviaGames arbitration case
July 31 drops to 6%12%
The Supreme Court declined to hear a related arbitration case involving sports event contracts, which dampened market expectations for a certiorari grant on the main sports event contract legality issues.
Tennessee files opening brief opposing Kalshi’s swap classification in Sixth Circuit
July 31 drops to 4%10%
Tennessee Attorney General filed a brief arguing that Kalshi’s sports event contracts are sports gambling, not swaps, opposing federal preemption claims and highlighting ongoing legal fragmentation that may prompt Supreme Court intervention.
Tennessee files brief opposing Kalshi's federal preemption claim
Tennessee's Attorney General filed a brief arguing that Kalshi's sports event contracts are essentially sports gambling and should be regulated by states, highlighting ongoing legal contention and uncertainty ahead of Supreme Court action.
Ninth Circuit Ruling Could Create Circuit Split on Sports Contract Preemption
A potential Ninth Circuit decision against Kalshi could create a circuit split with the Third Circuit's ruling, which would likely prompt a Supreme Court certiorari petition.
Tennessee files brief opposing Kalshi’s swap classification of sports wagers
July 31 dips to 13%3%
Tennessee Attorney General filed a brief arguing that Kalshi’s sports wagers are sports gambling, not swaps, emphasizing state regulatory authority. This filing underscored ongoing legal disputes and uncertainty about Supreme Court timing, contributing to market price declines.
Senate Subcommittee Hears Testimony on Prediction Markets as Unregulated Sports Gambling
December 31 surges to 48%24%
A Senate subcommittee hearing featured testimony from the American Gaming Association stating that prediction‑market contracts are effectively unregulated sports gambling. The political spotlight increased speculation that the Supreme Court might be asked to resolve the dispute, nudging the market upward.
Parties request stay pending Supreme Court certiorari decision
July 31 dips to 7%1%
In ongoing litigation, parties jointly requested the court to stay proceedings pending the Supreme Court's decision on whether to grant certiorari, signaling anticipation of Supreme Court involvement and affecting market expectations.
Supreme Court expected to consider whether states can ban sports event contract trading
July 31 drops to 23%10%
Reports indicated that the U.S. Supreme Court would be asked to rule on whether states have the authority to ban sports event contract trading on federally regulated prediction markets, reflecting the high-profile nature of the dispute and increasing market speculation about certiorari.
Supreme Court asked to rule on state authority to ban sports event contracts
December 31 drops to 5%6%
The U.S. Supreme Court was formally asked to consider whether states can ban sports event contract trading on federally regulated prediction markets, signaling a potential upcoming certiorari grant though not yet confirmed.
Senate subcommittee hears testimony on sports event contract trading as unregulated sports gambling
July 31 dips to 14%2%
A Senate subcommittee received testimony from the American Gaming Association asserting that sports event contract trading is unregulated sports gambling, highlighting the controversy and regulatory uncertainty. This political attention increased market awareness of the issue's significance and the potential for Supreme Court review.
Supreme Court likely to consider whether states can ban sports event contracts on prediction markets
July 31 drops to 5%6%
Reports indicated the Supreme Court was being asked to decide if states have the authority to ban sports event contract trading on federally regulated prediction markets, involving New Jersey and Kalshi. This heightened market attention on a possible certiorari grant, though no official confirmation was made by late May.
Supreme Court will field case about whether states can regulate prediction markets
An article reported that the Supreme Court was expected to field a case on prediction‑market regulation, reigniting speculation that certiorari could be granted before the July deadline. The news nudged the July 31 “Yes” price up modestly from about 6 % on 2026‑04‑30 to 6 % on 2026‑05‑07 (no measurable jump, but it halted the previous decline).
Parties request stay of proceedings pending Supreme Court certiorari decision
In ongoing litigation over sports event contracts, parties jointly requested the court to stay proceedings pending the Supreme Court's decision on whether to grant certiorari. This indicated anticipation of Supreme Court review and influenced market expectations for a certiorari grant by July 31, 2026.
Kalshi and New Jersey request stay of proceedings pending Supreme Court certiorari decision
Kalshi and New Jersey jointly requested the Third Circuit to stay all proceedings pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to grant or deny certiorari in the case concerning sports event contracts. This filing publicly confirmed that a certiorari petition was imminent, reflecting high market anticipation of Supreme Court review by the July 31 deadline.
Supreme Court likely to decide on state regulation of prediction markets soon
July 31 rises to 7%2%
On May 22, 2026, reports indicated that the Supreme Court might soon decide whether states can regulate sports event contracts on prediction markets, reflecting ongoing litigation and the anticipation of certiorari, which influenced market prices downward due to uncertainty about timing.
No SCOTUS certiorari grant announced as July deadline approaches
July 31 drops to 5%8%
Multiple news sites reported that the Supreme Court had not yet granted certiorari but that petitions were expected in early July, reinforcing market expectations that the deadline was approaching without a grant and pushing the “No” (July 31) probability higher.
Supreme Court may decide on state authority to regulate prediction markets
Reports indicated the Supreme Court might soon decide whether states can regulate sports event contracts on prediction markets, reflecting growing anticipation of certiorari. This news influenced market sentiment about the timing and likelihood of Supreme Court review by July 31, 2026.
Supreme Court petition filed by New Jersey seeking review of Kalshi sports event contract case
July 31 dips to 14%2%
Following adverse rulings in district and appellate courts, New Jersey filed a petition for Supreme Court review challenging the federal preemption of state gambling laws over sports event contracts, increasing market speculation about certiorari.
Industry reports Supreme Court may consider state authority to ban sports event contracts
July 31 jumps to 18%6%
Reports emerged that the Supreme Court might address whether states can ban sports event trading on federally regulated prediction markets, fueling speculation about certiorari and causing some price fluctuations.
Supreme Court to Stay Proceedings Pending Certiorari Decision
The parties requested that the Supreme Court continue to stay proceedings pending any decision by the Court to grant or deny certiorari, confirming the Court's potential role in resolving the federal versus state authority question.
Supreme Court asked to rule on state authority to ban sports event contract trading
July 31 drops to 13%10%
The U.S. Supreme Court was formally petitioned to decide whether states can ban sports event contract trading on federally regulated prediction markets, specifically involving New Jersey and Kalshi. This petition raised market speculation about a possible certiorari grant.
Analysts note SCOTUS will release October certiorari list in early October
December 31 rises to 26%2%
Multiple news outlets reported that the Supreme Court was expected to announce its October certiorari list in early October, reminding traders that any grant would have to appear then. The reminder caused a brief uptick in the Yes price for the December‑31 outcome, but the overall trend stayed down for July‑31.
Supreme Court poised to hear case on state regulation of prediction‑market sports contracts
December 31 plunges to 19%31%
Casino.org reported that the Supreme Court is expected to hear a case on whether states can regulate prediction‑market sports contracts, explicitly mentioning a petition for certiorari. The story resurfaced the market’s focus on a December‑31 deadline and pushed the “December 31” odds down from 50% to the mid‑teens.
SCOTUS to Rule on State Authority to Ban Sports Event Contracts
The Supreme Court will be asked to decide whether a state has the right to ban sports event contract trading on prediction markets, following New Jersey's lawsuit against Kalshi.
Parties request stay pending Supreme Court decision on certiorari in Kalshi case
December 31 dips to 24%4%
In a joint status report, parties requested the court to stay proceedings pending the Supreme Court's decision to grant or deny certiorari in the Kalshi case, signaling anticipation of SCOTUS review but no confirmation yet, causing market uncertainty.
New Jersey announces intent to take Kalshi case to the Supreme Court
July 31 rises to 7%1%
New Jersey publicly declared its intention to appeal the Third Circuit decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, reinforcing the expectation that the high court will consider the case. This announcement contributed to market price movements reflecting increased likelihood of certiorari.
Better Markets criticizes CFTC's regulatory approach to sports event contracts
July 31 dips to 8%4%
Better Markets issued a statement arguing that the Supreme Court left sports betting regulation to the states, not the CFTC, challenging the federal regulatory claims of prediction markets. This added to the legal debate but did not directly affect certiorari likelihood, contributing to market uncertainty.
No Supreme Court certiorari granted on sports event contracts by mid-May
July 31 dips to 5%1%
By mid-May 2026, no public confirmation of Supreme Court certiorari grants on sports event contract cases had appeared on the official docket or credible legal reporting, reducing market confidence in a July 31 grant.
New Jersey and Kalshi request stay of proceedings pending Supreme Court decision
July 31 drops to 6%7%
Following the Third Circuit ruling, New Jersey and Kalshi jointly requested the court to stay all proceedings pending the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to grant or deny certiorari. This filing indicates both parties anticipate Supreme Court review within the analysis window.
SCOTUS denies certiorari on unrelated arbitration case involving AviaGames
December 31 drops to 24%9%
The Supreme Court denied certiorari on an arbitration case unrelated to sports event contracts, indicating no immediate SCOTUS action on the sports contracts issue and contributing to market declines in certiorari likelihood.
Supreme Court maintains status quo on abortion pill access, no sports contract case cert granted
The Supreme Court issued an order on a high-profile abortion pill case but did not grant certiorari on any sports event contract cases. This absence of cert grants on sports contracts by mid-May 2026 aligns with the market's low probability pricing for a July 31 cert grant.
Legal analyst predicts Supreme Court unlikely to grant certiorari on sports‑event contract case
December 31 plunges to 14%19%
A widely‑cited legal commentary argued that the Court’s recent docket shows no appetite for taking up CFTC‑state preemption disputes, reinforcing the market’s bearish trend.
Legal experts predict Supreme Court will await circuit split before granting certiorari
July 31 drops to 5%5%
Legal analysis indicated that the Supreme Court is unlikely to grant certiorari on sports event contract cases until a clear circuit split emerges, with the Ninth Circuit and Fourth Circuit decisions pending. This tempered market expectations for a July 31, 2026 certiorari grant.
Federal judge bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators in Kalshi case
July 31 drops to 4%5%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against Kalshi, a prediction market operator, citing federal Commodity Exchange Act preemption. This ruling highlighted ongoing legal disputes over regulation of event contracts but did not involve Supreme Court certiorari.
Supreme Court declines to intervene in National Guard deployment case
December 31 drops to 13%14%
The Supreme Court's refusal to allow the Trump administration to deploy National Guard troops in Chicago signaled a rare setback for the administration's executive power agenda, dampening expectations for aggressive SCOTUS intervention in other areas.
Kalshi reports record Super Bowl trading volume, faces processing delays
December 31 drops to 14%14%
Kalshi disclosed a $1 billion‑plus trading volume on Super Bowl contracts, but also noted deposit processing issues. The mixed news sparked a brief rally followed by a sell‑off as traders worried about operational risks and regulatory scrutiny.
Kalshi settles dispute over Cardi B’s Super Bowl halftime show performance in prediction market
July 31 drops to 14%14%
Kalshi resolved a dispute about whether Cardi B’s cameo counted as a performance in a Super Bowl halftime show prediction market, returning money to users due to ambiguity. This event highlighted regulatory and operational challenges but was unrelated to Supreme Court certiorari on sports contracts.
Massachusetts high court grills Kalshi on whether its sports contracts are gambling
July 31 plunges to 10%21%
Oral arguments in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court showed justices skeptical of Kalshi’s claim that its contracts are swaps, prompting a steep drop in the "July 31" probability as market participants feared a state‑court defeat could deter a Supreme Court review.
Massachusetts High Court Considers Ban on Kalshi’s Sports‑Event Contracts
December 31 surges to 63%36%
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court heard arguments on whether the state could ban Kalshi’s sports‑event contracts. The court’s apparent openness to upholding the ban revived concerns of a circuit split and gave a modest boost to “Yes” odds.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court hears arguments on Kalshi sports wagering case
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court considered whether Kalshi's sports-related contracts constitute sports wagering requiring a state license, with federal preemption issues also at stake, adding to the legal complexity and market uncertainty.
Federal court allows Kalshi to continue offering sports event contracts during litigation
December 31 drops to 33%9%
A U.S. federal court ruled that Kalshi can continue offering sports event contracts while litigation proceeds, affirming the contracts as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. This decision maintained the status quo and influenced market perceptions of regulatory risk.
Legal experts project Supreme Court review of prediction market sports contract cases by 2027
July 31 drops to 12%12%
Analysts noted the growing circuit split and conflicting appellate rulings increase the likelihood of Supreme Court certiorari by 2027, though no grant had yet occurred. This tempered market optimism for a 2026 resolution but confirmed the high stakes of the litigation.
Federal judge denies Arizona's attempt to prosecute Kalshi under state gambling laws
July 31 dips to 14%2%
A federal judge's ruling that federal law preempts Arizona's gambling laws in the Kalshi case reinforced the CFTC's regulatory authority, reducing expectations that the Supreme Court would need to intervene on sports event contract legality.
Supreme Court likely to take prediction market case by 2027 amid circuit split
July 31 plunges to 7%20%
Legal experts noted the growing circuit split between the Third and Ninth Circuits on the regulation of sports event contracts, increasing the likelihood of Supreme Court review by mid-2027. This anticipation affected market pricing, reflecting expectations of eventual Supreme Court intervention to resolve federal-state regulatory conflicts.
38 State Attorneys General oppose Kalshi as CFTC asserts exclusive jurisdiction
July 31 drops to 37%9%
A coalition of 38 state attorneys general filed a brief opposing Kalshi's position, while the CFTC filed an amicus brief supporting federal preemption, highlighting the contentious legal battle and increasing uncertainty about Supreme Court review.
CFTC files amicus brief affirming exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets in Massachusetts case
December 31 plunges to 42%25%
The CFTC filed an amicus brief in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court asserting its exclusive jurisdiction over commodity derivatives markets, including sports event contracts. This federal assertion intensified the regulatory dispute and highlighted the likelihood of eventual Supreme Court involvement.
38 State Attorneys General oppose Kalshi in Massachusetts lawsuit over sports betting
December 31 plunges to 42%25%
A coalition of 38 state attorneys general filed a brief opposing Kalshi's position in the Massachusetts lawsuit, arguing against federal preemption and supporting state regulation of sports event contracts. This opposition underscored the federal-state conflict and the potential need for Supreme Court resolution.
Analysis highlights potential circuit split increasing odds of Supreme Court review
An April 24, 2026 analysis noted that the Third Circuit's ruling favoring Kalshi and the Ninth Circuit's opposing stance could create a circuit split, a key factor that raises the likelihood of Supreme Court certiorari. Market odds reflected increased speculation about a Supreme Court case by year-end.
CFTC and 38 states clash in Massachusetts over prediction‑market jurisdiction
July 31 plunges to 26%32%
The CFTC filed an amicus brief in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction, while 38 state attorneys general filed a counter‑brief. The showdown amplified uncertainty and pushed the market sharply toward the “No” (July 31) outcome.
Analysis highlights potential circuit split prompting SCOTUS review
December 31 drops to 11%5%
Legal analysis noted the Third Circuit ruling and ongoing Ninth Circuit cases could produce a circuit split on federal preemption of state gambling laws, making Supreme Court certiorari more likely to resolve conflicting decisions.
38 State Attorneys General oppose Kalshi as CFTC files amicus brief asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction
A coalition of 38 state attorneys general filed a brief opposing Kalshi's position, while the CFTC filed an amicus brief supporting exclusive federal jurisdiction over prediction markets. This highlights the intense legal conflict and the likelihood of Supreme Court involvement to resolve the dispute.
CFTC files amicus brief in Massachusetts case as 38 states push opposite view
July 31 jumps to 25%5%
The CFTC filed an amicus brief in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court supporting preemption, while 38 state attorneys general filed a counter‑brief. The high‑profile clash amplified expectations of a Supreme Court review, briefly lifting the “July 31” odds before the market steadied.
CFTC files amicus brief in Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction
December 31 drops to 28%5%
The CFTC filed an amicus brief affirming its exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets, including sports event contracts, in response to Massachusetts' lawsuit against Kalshi. This highlighted federal-state regulatory conflicts and kept market uncertainty high.
CFTC amicus brief and 38 AGs’ counter‑brief spotlight growing split over prediction markets
July 31 dips to 11%3%
The CFTC filed an amicus brief in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction, while 38 state AGs filed a counter‑brief. The intensifying legal battle signaled a widening split and further lowered confidence that the Supreme Court would take the case by July 31.
CFTC files amicus brief asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction in Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
July 31 drops to 36%13%
The CFTC filed an amicus brief in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction over Kalshi and all CFTC-regulated prediction markets, opposing a state preliminary injunction and reinforcing federal preemption claims.
Legal analysts highlight circuit split increasing odds of Supreme Court review
December 31 rises to 59%4%
Legal commentary noted the growing circuit split between the Third and Ninth Circuits on sports event contracts, suggesting this division makes Supreme Court certiorari more likely. Market odds for a December 31 certiorari grant rose accordingly.
CFTC files lawsuits against states to reaffirm exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets
July 31 drops to 5%7%
In April 2026, the CFTC sued Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois to challenge state actions against CFTC-registered designated contract markets, reinforcing federal authority and increasing the likelihood of Supreme Court involvement to resolve jurisdictional conflicts.
Federal court allows Kalshi to continue offering sports event contracts during litigation
July 31 drops to 56%14%
A federal court ruled that Kalshi’s sports event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, allowing the platform to continue operations despite ongoing litigation. This ruling reinforced the federal regulatory framework and affected market expectations about the likelihood of Supreme Court involvement.
Supreme Court adds Kalshi-related cases to 2026-27 docket
December 31 plunges to 24%26%
The Supreme Court added two cases related to Kalshi and sports event contracts to its docket for the 2026-27 term, signaling potential future review though no certiorari grant was yet announced. This development influenced market expectations about eventual Supreme Court involvement.
Supreme Court hears arguments on unrelated sports‑law case, fueling speculation on related certiorari request
July 31 dips to 11%2%
While the Court debated transgender‑athlete bans, observers noted the similarity to the sports‑contract regulatory issue, prompting traders to further downgrade the likelihood of a certiorari grant.
Report highlights likelihood of Supreme Court review amid circuit split
July 31 drops to 16%11%
Legal analysts and industry experts noted that a circuit split between the Third and Ninth Circuits on the regulation of sports event contracts could prompt the Supreme Court to grant certiorari. This analysis influenced market sentiment about the timing and probability of Supreme Court intervention.
Ninth Circuit hears Kalshi arguments on Nevada enforcement challenge
July 31 drops to 20%7%
The Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments on Kalshi’s challenge to Nevada’s enforcement actions. Media coverage of the hearing highlighted the growing appellate split, which further depressed the market’s July‑31 probability.
Ninth Circuit hears consolidated oral arguments on sports event contracts
The Ninth Circuit heard arguments in cases involving Kalshi and others, with potential to create a circuit split on federal versus state regulation of sports event contracts, heightening prospects for Supreme Court intervention.
Ninth Circuit panel hears oral arguments on Nevada enforcement of state gambling laws against prediction markets
July 31 jumps to 24%8%
The Ninth Circuit heard appeals challenging Nevada's enforcement of state gambling laws against CFTC-regulated event contracts. This case could deepen the circuit split and increase the likelihood of Supreme Court intervention, impacting market expectations for certiorari.
Ninth Circuit to Hear Oral Arguments in Sports Event Contract Cases
The Ninth Circuit scheduled consolidated oral arguments on April 16, 2026, in cases involving Kalshi, Robinhood and Crypto.com, with the panel expected to rule on whether the Commodity Exchange Act applies to sports-related event contracts traded on CFTC-licensed designated contract markets.
Ninth Circuit hears arguments in parallel sports contract cases
July 31 jumps to 27%11%
On April 16, 2026, the Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments in cases challenging the legality of sports event contracts under state gambling laws. The potential for a circuit split with the Third Circuit heightened the likelihood of Supreme Court review, influencing market prices.
Ninth Circuit hears arguments on Nevada’s fight with Kalshi over sports contracts
July 31 jumps to 25%11%
The Ninth Circuit began hearing arguments on whether Nevada could block Kalshi’s sports contracts, raising the prospect of a circuit split that could drive the issue to the Supreme Court. The uncertainty caused a modest bounce in the "July 31" odds.
Ninth Circuit hears oral arguments in parallel sports event contract cases
The Ninth Circuit held consolidated oral arguments involving Kalshi and other platforms challenging state gambling laws. A differing ruling from the Third Circuit could create a circuit split, increasing the chances of Supreme Court certiorari to resolve conflicting federal and state regulatory authority.
Ninth Circuit hears consolidated appeals challenging CFTC jurisdiction over sports contracts
July 31 plunges to 36%26%
The Ninth Circuit heard arguments in cases involving Kalshi, Robinhood, and Crypto.com, with skepticism expressed about whether sports-related contracts qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. This raised the possibility of a circuit split, increasing the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
Ninth Circuit to hear consolidated oral arguments on sports event contracts
The Ninth Circuit scheduled consolidated oral arguments for April 16, 2026, in cases involving Kalshi, Robinhood, and Crypto.com concerning the regulation of sports event contracts. The outcome could create a circuit split, increasing the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
Ninth Circuit hears arguments on federal preemption over Nevada sports contracts
December 31 drops to 55%11%
The Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments on whether federal CFTC authority preempts Nevada state gaming laws regarding sports event contracts. This case could create a circuit split with the Third Circuit, increasing chances for Supreme Court intervention.
Ninth Circuit Begins Hearing Kalshi Sports Contract Cases
July 31 plunges to 5%22%
The Ninth Circuit started hearing arguments in Kalshi, Crypto.com, and Robinhood cases challenging Nevada's ban on sports event contracts, potentially creating a circuit split that could prompt Supreme Court review.
Ninth Circuit to hear consolidated oral arguments on Kalshi and related cases
December 31 rises to 67%3%
The Ninth Circuit scheduled oral arguments involving Kalshi, Robinhood, and Crypto.com on April 16, 2026, to address CFTC jurisdiction over sports event contracts. This raised the possibility of a circuit split, which could prompt Supreme Court review, influencing market prices.
Ninth Circuit signals skepticism of Third Circuit's ruling on sports event contracts
December 31 jumps to 33%14%
The Ninth Circuit, hearing consolidated cases involving Kalshi and others, expressed skepticism about the classification of sports-related contracts as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, creating a circuit split that increased the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
Indian Gaming Association calls for congressional action against prediction markets
December 31 drops to 38%6%
Tribal gambling leaders expressed concern that prediction markets threaten their regulated gambling revenues and called on Congress to regulate these platforms. This highlighted ongoing legal and political challenges but did not indicate Supreme Court certiorari, contributing to market declines.
US families contest Italian citizenship law in highest court, unrelated to sports contracts
December 31 plunges to 37%25%
Two US families challenged Italy's citizenship law in the Italian Supreme Court, a significant legal event but unrelated to US Supreme Court or sports event contracts. This event had no direct impact on the market for SCOTUS sports contract case acceptance.
Prediction markets face lawsuits from states and tribes amid regulatory uncertainty
July 31 drops to 33%7%
Several states and tribal nations filed lawsuits against prediction market operators like Kalshi and Polymarket, alleging illegal gambling operations. The ongoing litigation raised the prospect of Supreme Court involvement but no certiorari was granted during this period.
BetMGM CEO says Supreme Court hearing of prediction‑market case is inevitable
December 31 jumps to 64%13%
BetMGM’s CEO Adam Greenblatt referenced an “expedient outcome of the almost inevitable hearing” by the Supreme Court during an earnings call, underscoring industry expectations of a SCOTUS petition and nudging the “December 31” odds upward.
CFTC announces Innovation Advisory Committee to study prediction‑market regulation
July 31 drops to 7%6%
The creation of a high‑level advisory panel signaled ongoing federal commitment to overseeing prediction markets, further reducing speculation that the Supreme Court would intervene.
CFTC files friend‑of‑the‑court brief supporting Kalshi in Nevada case
July 31 drops to 8%5%
The CFTC submitted an amicus brief backing Kalshi’s appeal against a Nevada restraining order, emphasizing federal preemption of state gambling laws. Traders interpreted the filing as further solidifying federal jurisdiction, causing a modest price dip.
Supreme Court hears arguments on state bans of transgender athletes, raising speculation on broader sports‑related jurisdictional issues
While not directly about prediction markets, the Court’s focus on state regulation of sports sparked speculation that related disputes—such as the status of sports‑event contracts—could soon appear before the Court, prompting another price decline.
Federal judge rules event contracts fall under Commodity Exchange Act, preempting state gambling laws
July 31 plunges to 10%23%
A federal judge ruled that event contracts offered by Kalshi are regulated as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, supporting the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction and preempting state gambling laws. This legal clarification reduced market expectations for Supreme Court involvement by July 31.
Federal court rulings affirm CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets
December 31 plunges to 37%27%
Federal courts upheld the CFTC's exclusive regulatory authority over event contracts, reinforcing the argument that state gambling laws are preempted. While this strengthened the federal position, no Supreme Court certiorari grant followed, leading to mixed market reactions.
Prediction markets face lawsuits from tribal nations over gambling law violations
December 31 plunges to 37%23%
Four tribal nations sued Kalshi and Robinhood, alleging violations of federal law and state-tribal compacts, highlighting the growing legal challenges prediction markets face and increasing uncertainty about Supreme Court action.
CFTC announces upcoming rule proposal targeting prediction markets as derivatives
July 31 drops to 7%6%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission signaled it will propose new rules classifying prediction‑market contracts as derivatives, further cementing federal oversight and diminishing hopes for a SCOTUS case on state regulation.
NCAA asks court to stop DraftKings from using trademarked terms
December 31 surges to 59%15%
The NCAA filed a complaint against DraftKings, highlighting the ongoing legal friction between sports organizations and betting platforms, which kept the broader topic of sports betting regulation in the public eye.
Federal appeals court blocks New Jersey from regulating Kalshi sports contracts
December 31 plunges to 19%31%
The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit confirmed that oversight of Kalshi's sports-linked contracts falls solely under the CFTC, reinforcing federal preemption over state gambling laws. This ruling provided Kalshi with a crucial appellate precedent and increased the likelihood of Supreme Court involvement due to the emerging circuit split.
Third Circuit reaffirms preliminary injunction favoring Kalshi
December 31 jumps to 51%12%
The Third Circuit affirmed the preliminary injunction on April 7, confirming its earlier April 6 opinion. The reaffirmation reinforced expectations that the case would move toward SCOTUS, causing a brief spike in the Yes price for the December‑31 outcome before the later decline.
Third Circuit Court of Appeals rules New Jersey cannot block Kalshi sports swap contracts
July 31 surges to 57%41%
The Third Circuit ruled 2-1 that Kalshi’s sports event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and fall under exclusive CFTC jurisdiction, preempting New Jersey's gambling laws. This was a major legal victory for Kalshi and increased expectations for Supreme Court review due to the circuit split.
New Jersey Attorney General announces review of Third Circuit ruling against state gambling enforcement
July 31 plunges to 41%16%
Following the Third Circuit ruling favoring Kalshi, New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport stated the state strongly disagrees and is considering legal options including seeking rehearing or Supreme Court certiorari, signaling potential escalation to the Supreme Court.
Third Circuit rules in favor of Kalshi in sports event contracts case
July 31 surges to 51%32%
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled 2-1 that New Jersey cannot prohibit Kalshi from offering sports event contracts, emphasizing federal regulatory authority and increasing expectations of Supreme Court review.
Third Circuit Court of Appeals rules New Jersey cannot block Kalshi sports swap contracts
December 31 plunges to 19%31%
The Third Circuit ruled 2-1 that Kalshi's sports event contracts qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, placing them under exclusive CFTC jurisdiction and preempting New Jersey's gambling laws. This appellate decision affirmed a preliminary injunction and marked a major legal victory for Kalshi, significantly impacting the market's outlook on federal preemption and potential Supreme Court review.
Third Circuit affirms Kalshi’s sports‑event contracts are swaps, blocks New Jersey enforcement
July 31 surges to 52%38%
The Third Circuit issued a split decision that upheld a preliminary injunction, holding that Kalshi’s sports‑event contracts are swaps subject to CFTC jurisdiction and therefore pre‑empt New Jersey’s gambling laws. The ruling sparked a sharp rise in market confidence that the case would reach the Supreme Court, lifting the "July 31" probability from the low‑teens to over 50 %.
Third Circuit holds CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over sports event contracts
July 31 jumps to 40%12%
A divided Third Circuit panel ruled that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over sports-related event contracts, marking a significant federal appellate decision that increased expectations for Supreme Court review.
Third Circuit Rules Sports‑Event Contracts Are Swaps, Preempting New Jersey Law
December 31 rises to 54%4%
The Third Circuit issued a 2‑1 decision in *KalshiEX LLC v. Flaherty* holding that sports‑event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and that the CEA preempts New Jersey’s gambling laws. The ruling created the first federal appellate split and sparked speculation that the Supreme Court would grant certiorari, pushing the market’s “Yes” probability sharply upward.
Third Circuit affirms preliminary injunction for Kalshi, ruling sports event contracts are swaps under CEA
The Third Circuit ruled 2-1 that sports event contracts traded on CFTC-regulated designated contract markets qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, preempting New Jersey's gambling laws. This was the first federal appellate court decision on the issue, significantly increasing the likelihood of Supreme Court review due to the legal clarity it provided and the potential for a circuit split.
Third Circuit rules CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over Kalshi's sports event contracts
December 31 plunges to 19%31%
A divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over sports-related event contracts offered by Kalshi, preempting New Jersey's gambling laws. This was a landmark ruling increasing the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
Third Circuit finds CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over Kalshi’s sports‑event contracts
July 31 plunges to 4%23%
The Third Circuit issued a 2‑1 decision holding that sports‑event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and that the CFTC preempts New Jersey’s gambling statutes. The ruling raised the chance of a Supreme Court petition, causing the market’s “July 31” probability to fall sharply from the high‑70s to single‑digit levels.
Third Circuit rules CEA preempts state gambling laws for sports event contracts
On April 6, 2026, the Third Circuit issued a landmark ruling that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling laws as applied to sports-related event contracts traded on CFTC-licensed markets. This ruling increased expectations for Supreme Court review due to the potential for circuit splits.
Third Circuit rules sports‑event contracts are swaps, sparking SCOTUS‑certiorari speculation
July 31 surges to 77%61%
The Third Circuit issued its decision in KalshiEX LLC v. New Jersey, concluding that sports‑event contracts are “swaps” and that CFTC pre‑emption likely applies. The ruling created a clear circuit split, prompting markets to anticipate a SCOTUS certiorari petition and driving the July‑31 odds sharply upward from the low‑teens to a peak of 77% on 2026‑02‑12.
Third Circuit Ruling in KalshiEX v. Flaherty Affirms CFTC Preemption of Sports Event Contracts
The Third Circuit issued a landmark ruling in KalshiEX LLC v. Flaherty, No. 25-1922, becoming the first federal appellate court to hold that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling laws as applied to sports-related event contracts traded on CFTC-licensed designated contract markets.
Third Circuit rules New Jersey cannot block Kalshi sports‑event contracts
July 31 plunges to 11%23%
The Third Circuit issued a 2‑1 decision holding that Kalshi’s sports‑event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and therefore fall under exclusive CFTC jurisdiction, blocking New Jersey from enforcing its gambling statutes. The ruling reinforced the federal‑preemption argument and drove the market’s sharp drop in July‑31 confidence that the Supreme Court would grant certiorari.
Third Circuit rules CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over sports event contracts
July 31 surges to 68%18%
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that sports event contracts traded on CFTC-regulated designated contract markets qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, preempting New Jersey gambling laws. This landmark ruling increased expectations for Supreme Court review due to the legal significance and potential for a circuit split.
CFTC sues multiple states alleging preemption of state gambling laws
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission sued Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois alleging that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling laws as applied to event contracts offered by designated contract markets. This aggressive federal action underscored the regulatory conflict and increased the likelihood of Supreme Court intervention.
CFTC and DOJ sue states to block enforcement of gambling laws against prediction markets
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission and Department of Justice sued Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois to prevent these states from enforcing gambling laws against prediction market operators, asserting federal preemption under the Commodity Exchange Act. This federal intervention underscored the regulatory conflict and increased chances of Supreme Court involvement.
CFTC sues Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois claiming preemption of state gambling laws
December 31 surges to 62%17%
The CFTC filed a federal lawsuit in three states alleging that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts their attempts to regulate prediction‑market event contracts. The aggressive federal posture added urgency to the legal battle and nudged the “December 31” odds upward.
CFTC and DOJ sue Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois over state gambling laws on sports event contracts
July 31 jumps to 34%7%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission and Department of Justice filed lawsuits against three states asserting that state gambling laws are preempted by the Commodity Exchange Act as applied to sports event contracts offered on CFTC-licensed markets. This federal action signaled a strong regulatory push and heightened the stakes of ongoing litigation, impacting market expectations for Supreme Court involvement.
CFTC sues Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois over prediction‑market enforcement
July 31 surges to 36%22%
The CFTC filed federal lawsuits against Arizona, Connecticut and Illinois alleging those states were unlawfully obstructing federal oversight of prediction markets. The move signalled an escalation toward a possible Supreme Court clash, nudging the "July 31" odds higher later in April.
CFTC sues Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois asserting state enforcement actions are preempted by CEA
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed lawsuits against three states, asserting that their enforcement actions against prediction market platforms are preempted by the Commodity Exchange Act. This federal intervention underscores the regulatory conflict and supports the argument for Supreme Court review.
CFTC sues three states over pre‑emption of sports‑event contracts
July 31 plunges to 34%28%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed a federal suit against Arizona, Connecticut and Illinois alleging that the Commodity Exchange Act pre‑empts those states’ gambling statutes as applied to prediction‑market contracts. The filing underscored the federal‑state clash and pushed market sentiment toward a potential Supreme Court review.
CFTC Sues Arizona, Connecticut and Illinois Over State Enforcement of Prediction Markets
December 31 surges to 65%16%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed a joint lawsuit against three states, alleging that their enforcement actions against prediction‑market platforms are pre‑empted by the Commodity Exchange Act. The filing highlighted a federal push to protect CFTC‑regulated markets, further raising expectations of a Supreme Court review.
Kalshi reports record $1 billion trading volume on Super Bowl day amid prediction market growth
July 31 dips to 16%4%
Kalshi's record trading volume on a major sports event highlighted the growing prominence of prediction markets in sports betting, increasing public and regulatory attention but without direct Supreme Court action, contributing to market uncertainty.
Senators introduce bill to reclassify sports‑event contracts as gambling
December 31 drops to 45%11%
Congress introduced the “Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act,” which would strip the CFTC of authority over sports‑event contracts. The bill’s introduction revived concerns about legislative roadblocks, causing a modest dip in the “December 31” probability in early March.
Senators introduce bill to reclassify sports event contracts as gambling
July 31 drops to 14%6%
Senators Curtis and Schiff introduced the Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act, proposing to reclassify sports‑event contracts as gambling, which would strip them of CFTC jurisdiction. The legislative move added uncertainty and nudged the Yes price for a July‑31 cert grant lower.
Congress introduces bill to strip CFTC authority over sports prediction markets
July 31 plunges to 24%18%
Senators introduced the “Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act,” seeking to amend the Commodity Exchange Act to remove CFTC jurisdiction over sports contracts. The legislative push raised doubts about a favorable Supreme Court outcome, nudging the market toward the “No” side.
Congressional bill introduced to restrict sports and casino-style event contracts on prediction markets
Senators John Curtis and Adam Schiff introduced legislation aiming to amend federal law to prohibit sports and casino-style event contracts on CFTC-regulated platforms. This legislative development adds complexity to the regulatory environment and influences market expectations about Supreme Court intervention.
Kalshi’s legal victory in Arizona cited as precedent for federal preemption of state gambling laws
July 31 drops to 14%8%
Kalshi announced that the Arizona ruling was a “step in the right direction,” reinforcing the view that federal law governs event contracts. The market reacted by further discounting the likelihood of a Supreme Court grant of certiorari.
CFTC issues ANPR seeking comment on regulation of sports‑event contracts
July 31 drops to 16%7%
The CFTC released an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) soliciting comment on how the agency would treat “gaming” and “sports competition” contracts, signaling possible regulatory tightening and contributing to a modest dip in market confidence for a July‑31 cert grant.
States and tribal nations continue legal challenges against prediction markets
July 31 drops to 13%7%
Several states and tribal nations filed lawsuits against prediction market operators like Kalshi and Polymarket, alleging violations of state gambling laws. These ongoing legal battles dampened market optimism about a Supreme Court certiorari grant, contributing to price declines.
Federal government sues Connecticut, Arizona, and Illinois over state regulation of prediction markets
December 31 jumps to 64%9%
The federal government filed lawsuits against three states challenging their attempts to regulate prediction market operators, reinforcing the federal preemption argument and affecting market expectations about Supreme Court involvement.
Supreme Court could decide future of sports prediction markets
July 31 dips to 20%2%
A Sportico analysis highlighted the growing chance of Supreme Court review given the emerging circuit split, nudging the market slightly upward before later setbacks pulled the probability down again.
Trump administration asserts CFTC exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets in lawsuits
July 31 jumps to 31%11%
The federal government filed lawsuits against several states challenging their attempts to regulate prediction market operators like Kalshi and Polymarket. This legal action reinforced federal regulatory authority claims, sustaining market interest in a possible Supreme Court case on sports event contracts by July 31.
CFTC chairman announces Innovation Advisory Committee including prediction market CEOs
December 31 jumps to 63%9%
CFTC Chairman Michael Selig announced the creation of an Innovation Advisory Committee to help draft regulations on cryptocurrencies and prediction markets, including CEOs from Kalshi and Polymarket. This indicated federal regulatory engagement but no Supreme Court certiorari grant.
Kalshi reports record trading volume after Super Bowl event contracts surge
December 31 drops to 33%12%
A massive spike in trading volume and related media coverage highlighted the financial significance of prediction markets, but the lack of any SCOTUS action on related legal challenges kept price pressure downward.
Ohio Court Denies Kalshi's Preliminary Injunction, Upholds State Gaming Authority
July 31 drops to 5%9%
An Ohio district court denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction, allowing state regulators to treat the platform’s contracts as gambling. The setback reduced optimism that the Supreme Court would intervene, pushing the “Yes” probability lower.
Ohio court rules sports event contracts not swaps, upholding state gambling laws
July 31 drops to 23%6%
An Ohio court ruled that sports event contracts are not swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and upheld state gambling laws, contrasting with the Third Circuit ruling and contributing to the legal uncertainty driving market fluctuations.
Will outcome in prediction‑market appellate cases pave the way for Supreme Court review?
July 31 dips to 22%2%
An iGaming Business piece discussed how an appellate circuit split could fast‑track a Supreme Court petition, briefly raising market optimism for a certiorari grant.
CFTC files friend‑of‑the‑court brief supporting Kalshi in 9th Circuit appeal
December 31 plunges to 40%24%
The CFTC’s amicus brief signaled strong federal backing for prediction‑market operators, suggesting the issue could ascend to the Supreme Court, which further depressed market confidence.
Supreme Court could decide future of sports prediction markets
July 31 jumps to 20%6%
Sportico published an analysis highlighting the growing legal battle and the possibility of Supreme Court review, which coincided with a brief rally in the July 31 market (price rose from 14 % on 2026‑03‑03 to 20 % on 2026‑03‑10).
Federal government sues Connecticut, Arizona, Illinois over state regulation of prediction markets
July 31 jumps to 25%6%
The federal government filed lawsuits against three states challenging their attempts to regulate prediction market operators like Kalshi and Polymarket, reinforcing the federal preemption argument. This legal escalation briefly boosted market optimism for a Supreme Court review before July 31.
Federal government sues three states over their regulation of prediction markets
December 31 surges to 66%26%
The federal government escalated its legal fight by suing Connecticut, Arizona, and Illinois to challenge their regulation of prediction markets, reinforcing the administration's stance on federal preemption.
Federal government sues three states over prediction‑market regulation
December 31 drops to 53%8%
The Justice Department filed lawsuits against Connecticut, Arizona and Illinois, asserting that the CFTC, not the states, has authority over prediction‑market contracts. The move reinforced the view that a Supreme Court grant of certiorari was unlikely, pushing prices lower.
CFTC Chairman announces Innovation Advisory Committee including prediction market CEOs
July 31 jumps to 52%11%
CFTC Chairman Michael Selig announced a 35-member Innovation Advisory Committee to help draft regulations on cryptocurrencies and prediction markets, including CEOs of Kalshi and Polymarket. This indicated federal regulatory engagement but no Supreme Court case acceptance.
Federal judge denies Kalshi’s attempt to bar state prosecution but later issues favorable ruling
July 31 surges to 56%15%
Initially, a federal judge denied Kalshi’s request to block state prosecution under gambling laws, but subsequently issued a ruling favoring federal preemption by the CFTC over state laws. This legal back-and-forth contributed to market volatility and uncertainty about the Supreme Court’s involvement.
CFTC signals upcoming rulemaking targeting prediction markets
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced it is drafting new rules that could broaden the definition of swaps to include prediction‑market contracts, including those tied to sports events. The prospect of tighter federal regulation lowered confidence that the Supreme Court would need to intervene.
Federal courts issue mixed rulings on state efforts to ban Kalshi and Polymarket sports betting
July 31 dips to 14%3%
Federal and state judges issued mixed rulings on lawsuits involving Kalshi and Polymarket, with some courts siding with states and others with the platforms. This legal uncertainty contributed to market volatility but no Supreme Court certiorari grant was reported, keeping probabilities low.
Kalshi reports record trading volume during Super Bowl, highlighting prediction market growth
December 31 surges to 56%15%
Kalshi experienced a daily record of over $1 billion in trading volume on Super Bowl day, reflecting rapid growth and increased public attention to prediction markets. This event underscored the industry's expansion but did not directly affect Supreme Court certiorari chances, contributing to market volatility.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket in legal battle over prediction markets
July 31 surges to 50%24%
The Trump administration, through the CFTC chairman Michael Selig, publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket, asserting federal regulatory authority over these markets and opposing state bans. This federal backing was significant for the market's expectations about legal outcomes related to sports event contracts.
Trump administration backs prediction markets against state bans
July 31 drops to 17%9%
The Trump administration, through CFTC Chairman Michael Selig, publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket, asserting federal regulatory authority and opposing state-level bans. This federal backing reduced expectations for a Supreme Court cert grant on sports event contracts, reflected in market price drops.
CFTC argues exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts in Arizona case
During oral arguments, the CFTC reiterated that event contracts are swaps subject to federal regulation, bolstering the argument that any Supreme Court review would likely favor federal preemption. The reaffirmation coincided with a sharp price drop.
U.S. District Judge rules in favor of CFTC, temporarily bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators
July 31 plunges to 67%22%
A federal judge's ruling affirmed that event contracts constitute regulated swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and that the CFTC has demonstrated a reasonable chance of success in showing federal preemption over Arizona law, directly impacting the market's legal criteria.
CFTC argues exclusive jurisdiction over swaps in Arizona case filing
July 31 drops to 13%14%
The CFTC submitted a brief emphasizing its exclusive authority over swaps, reinforcing the view that sports‑event contracts are regulated federally, which further dampened market expectations of a SCOTUS certiorari.
Kalshi reports record $1 billion trading volume on Super Bowl day amid prediction market surge
July 31 surges to 89%39%
Kalshi experienced a massive surge in trading volume on the day of the 2026 Super Bowl, highlighting the growing popularity and financial scale of prediction markets tied to sports events. This event underscored the importance of sports contracts in the prediction market ecosystem but did not directly influence Supreme Court certiorari.
Supreme Court hearing on independent agency power raises doubts on future market rulings
July 31 plunges to 11%17%
While not directly about prediction markets, the Court’s willingness to expand presidential control over agencies suggested a possible weakening of CFTC independence, causing a brief rally before the market corrected as traders reassessed the long‑term regulatory outlook.
Federal indictment exposes NCAA basketball game-fixing scheme involving players and gamblers
December 31 surges to 87%40%
Federal prosecutors announced charges against 26 individuals, including NCAA players, for rigging basketball games to defraud sportsbooks. This high-profile sports betting scandal heightened scrutiny on sports-related contracts and betting legality, impacting market perceptions about potential Supreme Court involvement in sports event contract regulation.
Kalshi trading volume spikes on Super Bowl, highlighting prediction market growth
December 31 plunges to 46%38%
Kalshi reported record trading volume during the Super Bowl, reflecting growing interest and regulatory scrutiny of prediction markets. This event increased market attention on the legal status of sports event contracts, contributing to price volatility in the December 31 outcome.
Judge rules in favor of CFTC in Arizona-Kalshi dispute, halting state prosecution
July 31 drops to 16%10%
A federal judge ruled that the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts, halting Arizona's criminal prosecution of Kalshi. This reinforced federal regulatory primacy and diminished the likelihood of a Supreme Court case on sports event contracts, contributing to market price declines.
Kalshi reports record trading volume on Super Bowl day amid prediction market growth
December 31 surges to 62%16%
Kalshi experienced a daily record trading volume exceeding $1 billion on Super Bowl day, highlighting the rapid growth and popularity of sports event contracts. This increased market activity underscored the stakes in ongoing legal disputes but did not trigger Supreme Court action.
Federal judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against Kalshi prediction market
July 31 surges to 50%23%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from prosecuting Kalshi under state gambling laws, ruling that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state regulation of event contracts like those offered by Kalshi. This ruling supported the federal regulatory framework over state gambling laws, impacting the market's outlook on sports event contract regulation.
Federal judge bars Arizona from regulating Kalshi and pauses criminal case
December 31 surges to 82%35%
A federal judge temporarily blocked Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against Kalshi, siding with the CFTC's claim that event contracts fall under federal swaps regulation. This ruling suggested federal preemption and increased chances of a Supreme Court case, causing a price spike in the December 31 market.
Federal government sues states over regulation of prediction markets including Kalshi and Polymarket
July 31 plunges to 26%39%
The federal government sued Connecticut, Arizona, and Illinois challenging their efforts to regulate prediction market operators, asserting that the CFTC has exclusive regulatory authority. This federal action underscored the ongoing legal conflict but did not involve a Supreme Court certiorari grant, influencing market sentiment downward for a cert grant by July 31.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket against state bans in legal battle
December 31 surges to 73%41%
The Trump administration publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket, asserting that the CFTC has exclusive regulatory authority and that state-level bans are preempted. This bolstered confidence that federal regulation would prevail, influencing market prices.
Federal judge in Tennessee grants Kalshi preliminary injunction blocking state sports betting enforcement
July 31 jumps to 34%14%
U.S. District Judge Aleta Trauger ruled that Kalshi's sports event contracts qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, granting federal protection and blocking Tennessee officials from enforcing state sports betting laws against Kalshi. This ruling supported the argument that federal law preempts state gambling regulation for these contracts, boosting market optimism.
Third Circuit rules CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over Kalshi sports event contracts
December 31 jumps to 59%9%
A divided Third Circuit panel held that Kalshi's sports-related event contracts are "swaps" under the Commodity Exchange Act, preempting state gambling laws and affirming CFTC's exclusive regulatory authority. This ruling increased confidence that federal regulation applies, impacting market expectations for Supreme Court review.
Tennessee court finds Kalshi’s sports contracts are swaps, not gambling
December 31 jumps to 56%10%
A Tennessee district court ruled that Kalshi’s contracts are swaps and therefore fall under CFTC jurisdiction, reinforcing the preemption argument and pushing the “December 31” probability higher in late February.
Middle District of Tennessee rules sports event contracts are swaps under CEA
July 31 surges to 36%20%
The court found that sports event contracts qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and that federal regulation preempts state gambling laws, supporting Kalshi's position. This ruling increased market optimism about SCOTUS review for the July 31 deadline.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket in legal battle over prediction markets
July 31 drops to 17%12%
The Trump administration, through CFTC Chairman Michael Selig, publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket, arguing that federal regulation preempts state gambling laws. This bolstered the federal regulatory stance but did not indicate Supreme Court certiorari, influencing market prices downward as states continue legal challenges.
CFTC files amicus brief asserting exclusive jurisdiction over sports event contracts
July 31 surges to 52%35%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit supporting federally regulated prediction markets, asserting that sports event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and preempt state gambling laws. This bolstered the argument for federal jurisdiction and influenced market expectations.
CFTC files amicus brief supporting exclusive federal jurisdiction over sports event contracts
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit supporting the view that sports event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, preempting state gambling laws. This reinforced federal regulatory authority and influenced market expectations about Supreme Court involvement.
CFTC filing asserts exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts, prompting industry backlash
July 31 drops to 16%12%
The CFTC submitted a brief to the Supreme Court reaffirming its exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts, arguing that state gambling statutes are preempted. Traders interpreted the filing as a sign the Court would not take up a sports‑event contract case, pushing prices down further.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket against state bans on prediction markets
July 31 rises to 37%1%
The Trump administration, via the CFTC chairman, publicly supported prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket, asserting federal regulatory authority and opposing state gambling restrictions. This federal backing influenced market expectations about regulatory outcomes and potential Supreme Court involvement.
Federal judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against Kalshi prediction market
July 31 jumps to 38%11%
A federal judge issued a temporary order preventing Arizona from prosecuting Kalshi for alleged illegal gambling operations, affirming the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts. This ruling was a significant legal victory for prediction markets, briefly boosting market optimism for a Supreme Court review by July 31.
Supreme Court weighs state limits on carrying guns on private property
July 31 drops to 27%7%
While not directly about sports contracts, the Supreme Court's focus on Second Amendment rights and private property limits during this period drew significant attention to the Court's docket, impacting broader market sentiment regarding SCOTUS intervention.
Ninth Circuit oral arguments scheduled for April 16, 2026, raising certiorari prospects
July 31 drops to 28%6%
The Ninth Circuit scheduled consolidated oral arguments for April 16, 2026, in cases involving Kalshi and others, increasing the likelihood of a circuit split that could prompt Supreme Court review. This event influenced market prices as traders anticipated a potential path to certiorari.
Judge rules CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over prediction market contracts
July 31 plunges to 20%57%
A federal judge ruled that event contracts fall within the Commodity Exchange Act's definition of 'swaps,' and that the CFTC has demonstrated a reasonable chance of success in showing that federal law preempts Arizona's gambling laws. This is a direct legal precedent for the market's resolution criteria.
Trader files CFTC complaint over Kalshi’s Super Bowl halftime‑show contract
Following the Super Bowl, a Kalshi trader lodged a complaint with the CFTC alleging the platform’s contract on Cardi B’s cameo violated the Commodity Exchange Act. The filing highlighted regulatory risk for sports‑event contracts, further dampening market optimism for a SCOTUS certiorari grant.
Kalshi reports record trading volume during Super Bowl, sparking regulatory scrutiny
July 31 surges to 52%38%
Kalshi experienced a record daily trading volume exceeding $1 billion on Super Bowl day, highlighting the growth of prediction markets tied to sports events. This surge drew complaints and regulatory attention but did not lead to Supreme Court certiorari, contributing to market uncertainty.
CFTC receives complaint over Kalshi’s Super Bowl contract handling
December 31 plunges to 28%25%
A trader filed a formal complaint with the CFTC alleging Kalshi violated the Commodity Exchange Act in its contract about Cardi B’s Super Bowl halftime appearance. The complaint highlighted regulatory scrutiny of sports‑event contracts, further dampening expectations of a favorable Supreme Court ruling and contributing to the price drop for the December 31 outcome from 53% to 28% by early May.
Nevada Gaming Control Board obtains temporary restraining order against Kalshi
December 31 drops to 46%9%
A state enforcement action against Kalshi added to the legal pressure on prediction markets, reinforcing concerns that the Supreme Court may need to decide the federal‑state jurisdiction issue.
CFTC withdraws proposed rule barring gaming‑related event contracts
July 31 jumps to 28%14%
The CFTC announced it was withdrawing a proposed rule that would have prohibited “gaming” contracts, a move interpreted by market participants as a possible softening of the agency’s stance toward sports‑event contracts, temporarily lifting the "July 31" odds.
CFTC withdraws proposed rule that would have prohibited gaming-related contracts
December 31 rises to 51%1%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission withdrew a proposed rule that would have banned contracts involving gaming, signaling regulatory openness to sports event contracts as swaps. This development supported the argument that such contracts fall under federal jurisdiction, impacting market sentiment positively.
Trump administration backs prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket amid state bans
July 31 drops to 27%9%
The Trump administration, through the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), publicly supported prediction market platforms Kalshi and Polymarket, asserting federal jurisdiction over these markets and opposing state-level gambling restrictions. This federal backing raised expectations that legal challenges might escalate to the Supreme Court, influencing market prices for the July 31 outcome.
CFTC withdraws proposed rule banning contracts involving gaming
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission withdrew a proposed rule that would have prohibited contracts involving gaming, signaling regulatory uncertainty and affecting market perceptions of federal authority over sports event contracts.
CFTC withdraws proposed rule that would have prohibited gaming-related contracts
On February 6, 2026, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission withdrew a proposed rule that would have banned contracts involving gaming, signaling regulatory openness to sports event contracts as swaps. This regulatory stance supported Kalshi's position and influenced market expectations about federal preemption of state laws.
Trump administration throws support behind prediction market operators
July 31 surges to 54%26%
The Trump administration, through the CFTC, officially backed Kalshi and Polymarket in their legal battles against states, signaling a shift toward federal oversight and away from state-level gambling bans.
CFTC withdraws proposed rule banning gaming-related contracts
July 31 jumps to 32%12%
On February 6, 2026, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission withdrew a proposed rule that would have prohibited contracts involving gaming, including sports event contracts. This regulatory development supported Kalshi's position and briefly increased market optimism for SCOTUS review.
Judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against prediction‑market operators
December 31 plunges to 34%18%
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi temporarily halted Arizona's criminal case against Kalshi, citing the CFTC's successful argument that event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, reinforcing federal preemption over state law.
Trump administration publicly backs Kalshi and Polymarket in state‑law battles
December 31 drops to 45%11%
The administration, through CFTC Chair Michael Selig, filed a friend‑of‑the‑court brief supporting Kalshi and Polymarket, signaling federal endorsement of their regulatory status and further lowering odds of a Supreme Court review of sports‑event contract cases.
Federal judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws on prediction‑market operator Kalshi
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi temporarily halted Arizona's criminal case against Kalshi, emphasizing that the CFTC has shown event contracts fall under the Commodity Exchange Act and may preempt state law. The decision signaled strong federal authority, reducing expectations of a Supreme Court review of the issue.
CFTC withdraws proposed rule banning contracts involving gaming
December 31 jumps to 34%7%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission withdrew a proposed rule that would have prohibited contracts involving gaming, signaling regulatory openness to sports event contracts and impacting legal interpretations of their status under federal law.
CFTC sues Minnesota over new felony law targeting prediction‑market contracts
July 31 surges to 62%46%
The CFTC filed a lawsuit challenging Minnesota’s new felony law on prediction‑market contracts, signaling federal intent to protect such markets. News of the suit coincided with a sharp rise in the July‑31 probability from 16% to over 60% in late February.
CFTC chair backs prediction‑market operators in fight against state bans
December 31 drops to 48%8%
CFTC Chairman Michael Selig publicly supported Kalshi and Polymarket, arguing that federal regulation preempts state gambling laws. The endorsement was taken as a signal that the agency would defend the industry, further lowering expectations of a Supreme Court review.
Federal judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against Kalshi, pauses criminal case
July 31 surges to 65%49%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against prediction market operator Kalshi, citing federal preemption by the Commodity Exchange Act and the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction over swaps. This ruling was significant for the market as it reinforced federal regulatory authority over event contracts, reducing the likelihood of state-level restrictions leading to Supreme Court intervention by July 31, 2026.
Judge rules CFTC prevails in Arizona prediction market lawsuit
July 31 plunges to 5%21%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from regulating prediction market operators, ruling that event contracts fall within the Commodity Exchange Act's definition of swaps and that federal law prevails over Arizona's gambling statutes. This decision significantly strengthened the federal regulatory position on prediction markets.
Judge rules CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts under Commodity Exchange Act
July 31 plunges to 5%21%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from regulating prediction market operators, ruling that event contracts constitute 'swaps' under the Commodity Exchange Act and that the CFTC has exclusive federal jurisdiction. This decision directly addresses the market's legal criteria regarding federal regulation of sports event contracts.
Judge rules CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts, preempts Arizona gambling laws
July 31 dips to 25%1%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from regulating prediction market operators, ruling that the CFTC has 'exclusive jurisdiction' over 'swaps' under the Commodity Exchange Act, demonstrating federal preemption over state gambling laws for sports event contracts.
Federal judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws on prediction‑market operators
July 31 drops to 15%11%
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi temporarily halted Arizona's criminal case against Kalshi, citing the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts under the Commodity Exchange Act. Traders saw the decision as a setback for state regulation, pushing down the July 31 and December 31 prices.
Federal judge bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators in Kalshi case
July 31 drops to 17%10%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against Kalshi, a prediction market operator offering event contracts including sports outcomes, siding with the CFTC's claim of exclusive federal jurisdiction. This ruling supported the view that such contracts fall under federal regulation, impacting market expectations for Supreme Court intervention.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket in legal battle with states
The Trump administration, through CFTC Chairman Michael Selig, publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket against state efforts to ban them, emphasizing federal regulatory authority over these markets. This bolstered market confidence in federal preemption over state gambling laws, initially supporting the possibility of Supreme Court involvement.
Federal judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against prediction‑market operator Kalshi
July 31 drops to 27%11%
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi temporarily halted Arizona’s criminal case against Kalshi, citing the CFTC’s claim that event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. The ruling suggested federal preemption, reducing perceived risk of a SCOTUS certiorari grant.
Federal judge bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators in Kalshi case
July 31 drops to 17%10%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against Kalshi, a prediction market operator, citing federal Commodity Exchange Act preemption. This ruling indicated federal authority over event contracts, impacting market expectations about state-level regulation and potential Supreme Court involvement.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket in legal fight against state bans on prediction markets
July 31 rises to 18%4%
The Trump administration, through CFTC Chairman Michael Selig, publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket, asserting federal regulatory authority over these markets and opposing state gambling laws. This bolstered confidence in federal preemption but did not indicate Supreme Court certiorari.
Ninth Circuit briefs highlight dispute over sports event contracts as swaps
The Ninth Circuit received detailed briefs arguing whether sports event contracts offered by Kalshi qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, with states asserting these are sports gambling subject to state regulation. This legal contention raised the possibility of a circuit split, influencing market expectations for Supreme Court review.
Judge bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators and pauses prosecution of Kalshi
July 31 dips to 24%1%
A federal judge temporarily blocked Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against Kalshi, citing the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts. This legal victory for prediction markets initially boosted market confidence in federal preemption.
CFTC Chairman Michael Selig publicly backs Kalshi and Polymarket against state bans
December 31 plunges to 19%31%
Selig’s statement that the CFTC will defend its exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets intensified speculation that a Supreme Court case on the issue might be imminent, pushing prices lower.
Federal district court in Tennessee hears case on sports event contracts regulation
A federal district court in Tennessee considered whether sports event contracts offered by Kalshi fall under federal or state regulation, highlighting early judicial scrutiny of the regulatory framework and contributing to market uncertainty.
Federal judge issues temporary restraining order blocking Tennessee enforcement against Kalshi
July 31 drops to 18%9%
U.S. District Judge Aleta Trauger granted Kalshi a temporary restraining order preventing Tennessee officials from enforcing state sports betting laws against Kalshi, citing likely federal preemption under the Commodity Exchange Act. This ruling was a significant early legal win for Kalshi and influenced market optimism about federal jurisdiction over sports event contracts.
Federal judge blocks Arizona from regulating prediction‑market operators, citing CFTC authority
July 31 drops to 14%13%
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against Kalshi, emphasizing that the CFTC has shown event contracts fall under the Commodity Exchange Act and likely preempt state law. The ruling lowered perceived chances of a Supreme Court case on sports‑event contracts, driving the July 31 price down from 27% to 14% and the December 31 price from 50% to 19%.
Trump administration backs prediction markets Kalshi and Polymarket in legal battles
July 31 dips to 24%3%
The Trump administration, through CFTC Chairman Michael Selig, publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket, asserting federal regulatory authority over these markets and opposing state gambling restrictions. This bolstered the legal position of prediction markets but did not involve Supreme Court certiorari on sports event contracts.
Federal judge bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators, pauses Kalshi prosecution
December 31 plunges to 19%31%
A federal judge ruled that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts, temporarily blocking Arizona from enforcing state gambling laws against Kalshi. This ruling supported the view that federal regulation preempts state laws, impacting the market's outlook on Supreme Court intervention.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket in legal fight against state gambling bans
July 31 jumps to 32%7%
The Trump administration, via CFTC Chairman Michael Selig, publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket, arguing federal regulation preempts state gambling laws. This bolstered market optimism that federal authority would prevail, temporarily increasing prices for July 31 resolution.
Federal judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against Kalshi prediction market
July 31 jumps to 36%9%
A federal judge temporarily blocked Arizona from prosecuting Kalshi under state gambling laws, affirming the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts as swaps under federal law. This ruling boosted confidence that federal regulation would preempt state gambling laws, impacting the market's outlook for Supreme Court intervention.
Federal judge blocks Arizona from enforcing gambling laws on prediction‑market operator Kalshi
July 31 drops to 25%5%
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi temporarily barred Arizona from pursuing its criminal case against Kalshi, citing the CFTC's claim that event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. The decision highlighted federal preemption, lowering market confidence in a SCOTUS certiorari request.
Supreme Court schedules oral argument for January 21, 2026, on related regulatory case
July 31 rises to 26%1%
The Supreme Court set oral argument for January 21, 2026, in a case involving federal regulatory authority, indicating active consideration of issues related to jurisdiction and regulatory preemption that could impact sports event contract cases.
Judge Michael Liburdi bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against Kalshi
July 31 rises to 26%2%
A federal judge temporarily halted Arizona’s criminal case against Kalshi, citing the CFTC’s claim that event contracts are swaps, which suggested a federal‑state clash that could reach the Supreme Court.
Federal government sues Arizona, Connecticut and Illinois over state bans on prediction markets
July 31 dips to 24%3%
The Justice Department filed a lawsuit claiming that the CFTC, not states, has exclusive authority over event contracts, raising the prospect of a Supreme Court review of the regulatory conflict.
Legal blog cites possible SCOTUS briefing on Kalshi prediction‑market case
December 31 rises to 27%3%
Rumors that SCOTUS had scheduled a briefing on the Kalshi case circulated in niche legal blogs, briefly pushing the “December 31” odds up to 27% before the market corrected to 24% by June 1.
New Jersey petitions Supreme Court for review of Kalshi ruling
December 31 drops to 31%7%
New Jersey filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court after the Third Circuit ruling, signalling a possible SCOTUS review and temporarily boosting market confidence in late December.
Analysts say circuit split makes Supreme Court review of sports‑event contracts likely in 2026
July 31 rises to 26%2%
Multiple legal analysts reported that the growing circuit split made a Supreme Court review likely in 2026, heightening speculation that SCOTUS would eventually take the case. The speculation revived market optimism, lifting the Yes probability from the low‑20’s on Dec 7 back up to 26 % by Dec 21.
Legal analysis highlights deepening federal court disagreement on sports event contracts
A December 19, 2025 legal alert detailed the divergent rulings among federal district courts regarding the regulation of sports event contracts, underscoring the lack of regulatory clarity and the potential for Supreme Court review to resolve the split.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket in legal battles over prediction markets
July 31 drops to 64%13%
CFTC Chairman Michael S. Selig publicly supported Kalshi and Polymarket, emphasizing that federal regulation should preempt state gambling laws, which further reduced expectations of a Supreme Court review.
No Supreme Court certiorari grant announced for sports event contract cases
July 31 rises to 26%2%
By mid-December 2025, no official Supreme Court certiorari grant was publicly confirmed for any case concerning sports event contracts, leading to market price stabilization around 26%.
SCOTUS expected to weigh in on ongoing prediction market debate soon
July 31 rises to 26%2%
Legal analysts and industry observers noted that the Supreme Court may soon address cases involving CFTC-regulated sports event contracts, reflecting growing pressure to resolve federal versus state regulatory conflicts. This anticipation caused a modest price increase late in the analysis window.
Massachusetts AG seeks court order to block Kalshi’s sports-prediction market
July 31 dips to 26%4%
The Massachusetts Attorney General filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent Kalshi from offering sports event contracts, arguing they constitute illegal sports wagering under state law. This state-level legal challenge underscored the ongoing conflict between federal preemption claims and state gambling laws, maintaining market uncertainty about Supreme Court intervention.
Experts predict Supreme Court likely to hear sports event contracts cases eventually
Legal analysts and industry experts expressed consensus that the Supreme Court will likely resolve the legal disputes over sports event contracts in the future, though timing remains uncertain. This tempered market optimism, reflecting a 'when, not if' view but no immediate certiorari grant.
Kalshi appeals Maryland court loss to Fourth Circuit
July 31 jumps to 42%8%
Kalshi filed an appeal to the Fourth Circuit after a Maryland district court denied its motion for a preliminary injunction, rejecting federal preemption of state gaming laws. This appeal, along with others, raised the prospect of a circuit split that would likely prompt Supreme Court review.
Legal experts predict Kalshi cases likely headed to Supreme Court amid split rulings
Following divergent rulings in federal courts across multiple states, legal analysts and industry experts anticipate that the conflicting appellate decisions will prompt a Supreme Court review to resolve the regulatory uncertainty surrounding sports event contracts. This expectation supported sustained market interest in a certiorari grant.
Kalshi sues Connecticut regulator over sports event contract restrictions
July 31 dips to 26%4%
Kalshi filed suit against Connecticut's Department of Consumer Protection demanding it cease enforcement actions against its sports event contracts. This lawsuit is part of a broader pattern of litigation challenging state regulatory authority and contributes to the legal uncertainty that may eventually require Supreme Court resolution.
Federal judge bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators in Kalshi case
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi's ruling temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against predictive market operators and put the brakes on a criminal prosecution of Kalshi. The order stated the CFTC had sufficiently shown that 'event contracts' fall within the Commodity Exchange Act's definition of 'swaps,' and that federal law likely preempts Arizona law. This is a direct legal precedent on the market's resolution criteria.
CFTC backs Kalshi and Polymarket as states move to ban prediction markets
CFTC Chairman Michael S. Selig publicly defended the industry, arguing that state attempts to ban prediction‑market contracts are preempted by federal law. The statement reinforced the view that the Supreme Court may be asked to resolve the jurisdictional clash, keeping downward pressure on prices.
Kalshi reports record $1 billion trading volume on Super Bowl event contracts
July 31 rises to 27%1%
Kalshi announced a daily record trading volume exceeding $1 billion on Super Bowl-related event contracts, underscoring the rapid growth and significance of sports event contracts in prediction markets. This event increased market attention on the regulatory status of such contracts.
Legal Analysts Predict Supreme Court Will Weigh In on Sports Event Contract Dispute
Legal experts and industry observers widely expect the Supreme Court to take up the issue of federal preemption over sports event contracts due to the ongoing circuit court splits and high stakes for the sports betting industry. This anticipation influenced market pricing toward a higher probability of certiorari by July 31, 2026.
Federal judge publicly confirms Kalshi subject to Nevada gaming rules
July 31 rises to 26%1%
The public release of the federal judge's decision confirmed Kalshi's subjection to Nevada gaming laws, lifting the prior injunction and signaling a legal defeat for Kalshi. This event reinforced the market's downward adjustment on Supreme Court certiorari chances.
Nevada federal judge dissolves preliminary injunction protecting Kalshi from state gaming laws
July 31 drops to 63%12%
U.S. District Judge Andrew Gordon reversed his April 2025 ruling and dissolved the injunction that had shielded Kalshi from Nevada's gaming regulations, ruling that Kalshi's sports event contracts are subject to state gaming laws. This marked a significant legal setback for Kalshi and increased the likelihood of Supreme Court review due to the resulting legal uncertainty.
CFTC signals courts may decide legality of sports event contracts
July 31 dips to 26%4%
The CFTC responded to senators indicating ongoing debate about whether sports event contracts constitute prohibited gaming under the Commodity Exchange Act. The agency suggested that courts may ultimately resolve the regulatory status, implying no imminent CFTC rulemaking or enforcement that would clarify the issue before the Supreme Court.
Nevada court dissolves injunction allowing Kalshi to offer sports contracts
July 31 dips to 25%4%
A federal judge dissolved the preliminary injunction that had allowed Kalshi to continue offering sports event contracts in Nevada, affirming state regulatory authority. This ruling further dampened expectations for a Supreme Court certiorari grant within the window.
Nevada judge dissolves preliminary injunction for Kalshi, rejecting federal preemption
July 31 plunges to 34%29%
U.S. District Judge Andrew Gordon reversed his earlier ruling and dissolved the preliminary injunction that had protected Kalshi from Nevada state gaming laws, holding that the Commodity Exchange Act does not preempt state regulation of sports event contracts. This ruling deepened the legal conflict and increased the likelihood of appeals and Supreme Court review.
Nevada Federal Court Dissolves Kalshi Preliminary Injunction, Rejects CEA Preemption
July 31 dips to 26%4%
Chief Judge Gordon reversed his earlier ruling by dissolving the preliminary injunction for Kalshi and rejecting the argument that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state regulation of sports event contracts. This deepened legal uncertainty and reduced market confidence in a near-term SCOTUS certiorari grant.
Nevada court dissolves Kalshi preliminary injunction, rejects CEA preemption
July 31 dips to 26%2%
Chief Judge Andrew Gordon of the U.S. District Court for Nevada dissolved his earlier preliminary injunction for Kalshi and rejected the view that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state regulation of sports event contracts. This reversal deepened the split among federal courts and heightened expectations for Supreme Court review.
Federal judge dissolves preliminary injunction for Kalshi, rejecting CEA preemption
July 31 drops to 26%5%
On November 24, 2025, Chief Judge Andrew Gordon dissolved an earlier preliminary injunction for Kalshi, rejecting the argument that the Commodity Exchange Act preempted state regulation of sports event contracts. This ruling deepened the split among federal courts and increased the likelihood of Supreme Court intervention.
Nevada federal judge dissolves preliminary injunction protecting Kalshi from state gaming laws
July 31 surges to 59%43%
Chief Judge Andrew Gordon of the U.S. District Court for Nevada reversed his earlier ruling and dissolved the preliminary injunction that had blocked Nevada gaming regulators from enforcing state laws against Kalshi's sports event contracts. He ruled that these contracts are not "swaps" under the CEA and thus fall outside CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction, deepening the split among courts and increasing chances of Supreme Court review.
Chief Judge dissolves preliminary injunction for Kalshi, rejecting CEA preemption
July 31 drops to 63%12%
Chief Judge Andrew Gordon dissolved an earlier preliminary injunction for Kalshi and rejected the argument that the Commodity Exchange Act preempted state regulation of sports event contracts, intensifying legal uncertainty and increasing pressure for Supreme Court intervention.
Nevada judge dissolves Kalshi injunction, says contracts fall under state gaming law
July 31 drops to 24%7%
Judge Gordon dissolved the earlier preliminary injunction that had protected Kalshi, ruling that the sports‑event contracts are not protected by federal preemption. The decision sharply reduced market confidence, pulling the Yes probability down from the early‑November high of ~31 % to the low‑20 % range by early December.
Legal analysis highlights federal-state conflict over sports event contracts regulation
July 31 dips to 26%2%
Legal experts emphasized the ongoing tension between federal regulation by the CFTC and state gambling laws, noting the lack of clarity and the likelihood of Supreme Court intervention, which maintained market interest in a certiorari grant.
Nevada District Court Dissolves Preliminary Injunction in Kalshi Sports Event Contracts Case
Chief Judge Gordon granted the motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction, concluding that Kalshi's sports event contracts are not 'swaps' within the meaning of the CEA and therefore fall outside the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction.
Federal government sues three states over their regulation of prediction markets
July 31 drops to 27%12%
The Justice Department filed lawsuits against Connecticut, Arizona and Illinois, asserting that the CFTC, not the states, has exclusive authority over prediction‑market contracts. The filing heightened expectations that the Supreme Court will not intervene, prompting a sharp drop in the July 31 price from 39% to 27%.
Supreme Court hears arguments on federal agency authority, hinting at impact on prediction‑market jurisdiction
July 31 jumps to 44%13%
During oral arguments on the Court’s view of executive power over independent agencies, justices discussed the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction over swaps, a point directly relevant to sports‑event contracts. The discussion raised uncertainty, prompting a modest rise in the Yes price.
Supreme Court signals support for Trump's power over independent agencies
July 31 surges to 44%15%
The Supreme Court's indication that it would expand presidential control over independent agencies suggested that the administration might achieve its goals through executive action rather than litigation, reducing the likelihood of a SCOTUS case on sports contracts.
Nevada judge denies preliminary injunction in similar sports contract case
July 31 jumps to 41%11%
In a case involving Crypto.com, Chief Judge Gordon denied a preliminary injunction, questioning whether sports event contracts qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, further complicating the legal landscape and fueling market speculation about a Supreme Court decision.
Market briefly rebounds on renewed speculation of Supreme Court certiorari grant
July 31 surges to 45%17%
The market saw a temporary increase in price as renewed speculation arose that the Supreme Court might grant certiorari later in 2026, fueled by ongoing appellate activity and legal commentary highlighting the importance of the case.
Tribal gaming leaders warn sports event contracts threaten tribal sovereignty
July 31 jumps to 41%13%
During an Indian Gaming Association webinar, tribal leaders and legal experts described sports event contracts as an existential threat to tribal gaming rights and sovereignty. Their opposition highlighted the broader political and legal stakes, influencing market sentiment about the likelihood of regulatory and judicial resolution.
Federal judge blocks Arizona from enforcing gambling laws on prediction‑market operators
July 31 rises to 32%4%
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi temporarily barred Arizona from pursuing its criminal case against Kalshi, citing the CFTC’s claim that event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. The ruling suggested federal preemption, reducing perceived chances of a Supreme Court review of the issue and nudging the July 31 price down from 28% to 32%.
Prediction markets spark tribal gambling concerns at Indian Gaming Association convention
July 31 jumps to 31%5%
Tribal leaders expressed concern that prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket threaten their regulated gambling enterprises, calling for congressional action. This highlighted the growing legal and regulatory challenges prediction markets face, influencing market sentiment.
Supreme Court begins new term with key cases but no sports event contract certiorari
The Supreme Court started its 2025 term with several high-profile cases, including transgender athletes and federal jurisdiction issues, but no certiorari grant was announced for sports event contract cases, tempering market expectations.
Petition for writ of certiorari filed in sports event contract case
July 31 drops to 25%7%
A petition for writ of certiorari was filed in early November 2025, seeking Supreme Court review of issues related to sports event contracts and federal preemption, raising market hopes for a grant before the July 31 deadline.
Federal government sues states over regulation of prediction markets including Kalshi
July 31 drops to 27%10%
The federal government sued Connecticut, Arizona, and Illinois challenging their efforts to regulate prediction market operators like Kalshi and Polymarket, asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction. This legal escalation underscored the ongoing conflict but did not result in Supreme Court certiorari within the window.
Federal courts uphold Kalshi's preliminary injunctions against state gaming laws
July 31 jumps to 33%5%
Federal district courts in New Jersey and Nevada granted preliminary injunctions favoring Kalshi, reinforcing the argument that federal Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling laws, increasing market confidence in Supreme Court certiorari.
Federal courts grant preliminary injunctions favoring Kalshi against state gaming laws
July 31 surges to 42%16%
Federal district courts in New Jersey and Nevada granted preliminary injunctions preventing state gaming authorities from enforcing laws against Kalshi’s sports event contracts, reinforcing the argument for federal preemption and increasing market confidence in Supreme Court involvement.
Federal courts split on state regulation of sports event contracts
July 31 surges to 62%46%
Federal district courts in Nevada and New Jersey issued preliminary injunctions blocking state enforcement against Kalshi's sports event contracts, while a Maryland court denied such relief, deepening the legal conflict and increasing the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket in legal battle
July 31 jumps to 40%14%
The Trump administration's formal support for prediction market operators, including the CFTC's intervention, suggested a federal-led resolution that might bypass the need for a Supreme Court case, leading to a temporary price increase.
Judge Andrew Gordon Rules Kalshi Contracts Subject to Nevada Gaming Laws
Judge Andrew Gordon's November 2025 decision found that Kalshi's sports event contracts are not swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and are subject to Nevada gaming laws when offered to state residents, shifting regulatory focus and increasing uncertainty about federal preemption.
SCOTUS grants certiorari in federal preemption of state gambling laws case
July 31 drops to 26%6%
The Supreme Court granted certiorari in a case challenging whether state gaming regulators can enforce laws against federally regulated sports event contracts, potentially resolving a major preemption issue.
Federal judge bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators, pauses Kalshi prosecution
July 31 drops to 27%8%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against prediction market operator Kalshi, citing the Commodity Exchange Act's exclusive federal jurisdiction over such markets. This ruling, supported by the Trump administration and the CFTC, indicated federal preemption over state gambling laws, impacting the market's outlook on Supreme Court intervention.
Kalshi files injunction motion against New York State Gaming Commission
July 31 drops to 26%8%
Kalshi filed a motion seeking an injunction against New York State Gaming Commission to prevent enforcement actions against its sports event contracts. This action indicated ongoing legal battles but no immediate Supreme Court involvement, contributing to market uncertainty.
Kalshi files injunction against New York State Gaming Commission
July 31 plunges to 41%23%
Kalshi expanded its legal challenge by filing for an injunction against the New York State Gaming Commission, highlighting the ongoing disputes over state regulation of federally licensed sports event contracts and sustaining market interest.
Kalshi files injunction motion in Southern District of New York
July 31 rises to 35%1%
Kalshi filed a motion seeking an injunction against the New York State Gaming Commission, escalating litigation over whether sports event contracts fall under federal CFTC regulation or state gaming laws.
SCOTUS may weigh in on prediction market debate
July 31 jumps to 75%12%
Legal analysis indicated SCOTUS may address the ongoing debate about whether CFTC-regulated sports event contracts are subject to federal laws, supporting the July 31 market outcome.
Kalshi cases likely heading to SCOTUS
July 31 jumps to 75%12%
Legal analysis indicated Kalshi may win on grounds of preemption, potentially broadening CFTC's definition of swaps to include sports event contracts, reinforcing the July 31 market outcome.
Nevada federal judge rules in favor of state in Crypto.com litigation
July 31 jumps to 75%12%
Judge Andrew P. Gordon's 27-page ruling in favor of Nevada on permissibility of sports event contracts intensified legal debate about federal preemption and state authority, supporting the July 31 market outcome.
Supreme Court's 2018 sports betting ruling revisited amid new criminal cases
July 31 rises to 63%1%
The spotlight returned to the 2018 SCOTUS decision that enabled legal sports betting nationwide, following arrests related to rigged sports bets and poker games. This renewed attention underscored the unresolved regulatory questions around sports event contracts.
SCOTUS 2018 Sports Betting Ruling Revisited Amid New Sports Betting Legal Challenges
July 31 dips to 62%1%
The 2018 Supreme Court decision allowing states to regulate sports gambling was highlighted again following arrests in sports betting-related criminal cases, underscoring the ongoing complexity and state-level control over sports betting, which influences the legal landscape for sports event contracts and SCOTUS interest.
NBA player and coach arrested in poker and sports betting fraud cases
July 31 drops to 34%5%
Arrests of over 30 people, including an NBA player and coach, in cases involving rigged sports bets and poker games with Mafia families, reignited public and legal interest in sports betting regulation and contract legality.
Nevada regulator confirms sports event contracts on hold amid legal dispute
July 31 dips to 62%2%
The Nevada Gaming Control Board announced that a sports event contract provider denied a preliminary injunction will not offer such contracts in Nevada until the related legal case is resolved. This news likely tempered market enthusiasm by highlighting ongoing legal uncertainty.
SCOTUS Sports Betting Ruling Spotlighted Amid Mafia-Linked Sports Betting Arrests
July 31 dips to 62%1%
The 2018 Supreme Court ruling that allowed states to regulate sports betting was highlighted following arrests related to illegal sports betting schemes. While not directly about sports event contracts, this news underscored the complex regulatory environment, indirectly affecting market sentiment on federal preemption and SCOTUS involvement.
Nevada halts sports event contracts amid ongoing legal challenges
July 31 drops to 33%10%
Nevada Gaming Control Board announced that a sports event contract provider would not offer contracts in Nevada until ongoing legal cases are resolved, highlighting regulatory uncertainty but no Supreme Court certiorari. This contributed to market volatility and a price decline to around 33%.
Nevada Gaming Control Board confirms suspension of sports event contracts
July 31 rises to 63%1%
The Nevada Gaming Control Board announced that a platform denied a preliminary injunction will not offer sports event contracts until litigation concludes, reinforcing legal uncertainty and causing price volatility.
2018 SCOTUS sports betting decision highlighted amid new sports gambling arrests
The 2018 Supreme Court ruling enabling state-level sports betting was cited in news coverage following arrests related to illegal sports betting schemes, underscoring the ongoing regulatory and legal complexities in sports gambling markets.
Federal judge dissolves preliminary injunction for Kalshi, rejecting federal preemption
July 31 plunges to 45%17%
Chief Judge Gordon of the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada reversed his earlier ruling by dissolving Kalshi's preliminary injunction and rejecting the notion that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state regulation of sports event contracts, intensifying legal uncertainty and speculation about SCOTUS review.
Federal judge denies preliminary injunction in Nevada sports event contract case
July 31 dips to 63%3%
A federal judge in Nevada denied a preliminary injunction against Crypto.com in a cease-and-desist lawsuit over sports event contracts, underscoring ongoing legal battles at the state level and the unresolved regulatory status of these contracts. This ruling maintained market uncertainty and influenced price fluctuations.
Nevada judge rules prediction market firm falls under state gaming laws
July 31 drops to 26%8%
A Nevada federal judge ruled that Kalshi's sports event contracts resemble sportsbook bets and are subject to state gaming laws, dissolving an injunction that had shielded Kalshi from state enforcement. This ruling challenged Kalshi's federal preemption argument and added legal uncertainty to the market.
Kalshi's Legal Challenge to State Gaming Regulators Advances
July 31 plunges to 32%33%
Kalshi continues its legal battle against state gaming regulators, with multiple cases in pipeline and heightened anticipation that the Supreme Court will resolve the federal preemption issue.
Kalshi lawsuit decision: Outcome-based contracts not swaps
July 31 plunges to 41%23%
A court rejected Kalshi's argument that sports event contracts are swaps, weakening its legal position and raising uncertainty about whether such contracts fall under CFTC jurisdiction.
Federal government sues states over regulation of prediction markets including Kalshi
July 31 drops to 31%8%
The federal government sued Connecticut, Arizona, and Illinois challenging their attempts to regulate prediction market operators, reinforcing the CFTC's claim of exclusive regulatory authority but no Supreme Court certiorari grant was reported, leading to a market price decline.
Indian Gaming Association raises concerns over prediction markets at annual convention
July 31 plunges to 41%23%
Tribal leaders expressed concern about the rapid growth of prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket, viewing them as a threat to tribal gambling revenues and regulatory frameworks. This highlighted the broader regulatory and legal challenges facing prediction markets, contributing to market uncertainty.
Senators criticize CFTC over sports event contracts used for sports betting
July 31 plunges to 32%21%
U.S. Senators publicly criticized the CFTC for its handling of event contracts used for sports betting, highlighting the contentious regulatory environment and increasing pressure on federal agencies and courts. This political scrutiny added to uncertainty about the legal status of sports event contracts and the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
Litigation intensifies over online sports prediction markets and CFTC jurisdiction
July 31 drops to 33%8%
Ongoing litigation involving platforms like Kalshi and Crypto.com raised significant questions about the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's jurisdiction and federal preemption over sports betting contracts. This heightened market anticipation of a Supreme Court review to resolve these regulatory conflicts.
Market price drops amid uncertainty over timing and scope of Supreme Court review
July 31 plunges to 34%30%
Following the initial surge, the market price declined sharply as it became clear that the Supreme Court had not yet granted certiorari and that the Court might limit its review to procedural issues rather than the substantive legality of sports event contracts.
Supreme Court grants certiorari in major gun rights case, not sports contracts
July 31 plunges to 41%26%
On October 20, 2025, the Supreme Court granted certiorari for a high-profile gun rights case involving federal gun bans for marijuana users, signaling the Court's docket priorities. This event likely shifted market focus away from sports contract cases, contributing to a decline in the probability of certiorari for the sports event contract case by July 31, 2026.
CFTC files friend‑of‑court brief supporting Kalshi in state‑regulation disputes
July 31 drops to 53%11%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission submitted an amicus brief defending Kalshi’s classification as a regulated swap market, reinforcing the argument that federal law preempts state gambling statutes. Traders interpreted the filing as a sign the Supreme Court may take up the issue, causing the price to retreat modestly.
Federal government sues three states over their regulation of prediction markets
July 31 plunges to 33%31%
The federal government's direct legal challenge against states attempting to regulate prediction markets signaled a shift toward federal preemption, initially boosting market confidence before it began to wane.
Supreme Court Certiorari Petitions for Sports Event Contracts Case Expected in Fall 2026
July 31 plunges to 34%30%
With major rulings expected by mid-2026, petitions are likely to be filed between July and September 2026, following the Ninth Circuit's decision on Nevada case against major prediction market operators.
Federal government sues Connecticut, Arizona, and Illinois over state regulation of prediction markets
July 31 plunges to 40%22%
The federal government filed lawsuits against three states challenging their efforts to regulate prediction market operators, asserting that the CFTC has exclusive regulatory authority. This legal escalation increased the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
U.S. government sues Connecticut, Arizona and Illinois over state regulation of prediction markets
The Justice Department filed lawsuits challenging three states’ attempts to regulate platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket, arguing that the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction. The move signaled a possible escalation to the Supreme Court, further depressing market prices.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket in legal battle against state bans
July 31 plunges to 34%19%
The Trump administration, through the CFTC chairman, publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket, emphasizing federal regulatory authority and opposing state-level bans. This federal backing was significant for the industry's legal standing but did not guarantee Supreme Court review.
Nevada federal court denies preliminary injunction for Crypto.com sports contracts
July 31 plunges to 34%29%
The U.S. District Court for Nevada denied a preliminary injunction for Crypto.com, a CFTC-registered exchange, rejecting claims that its sports event contracts are exempt from state regulation. This ruling marked a judicial pivot away from earlier decisions favoring federal preemption, increasing legal uncertainty and the likelihood of Supreme Court involvement.
Nevada federal court rules sports event contracts not exempt from state regulation
July 31 drops to 63%12%
The federal district court in Nevada rejected Crypto.com's claim that its sports event contracts are exempt from state regulation under the Commodity Exchange Act, holding that these contracts are not "swaps" and thus not covered by CFTC preemption. This ruling supported state authority over sports betting contracts and challenged the platforms' federal preemption arguments.
Supreme Court considers multiple high-profile cases but no sports event contract certiorari granted
July 31 rises to 64%2%
As the Supreme Court began its October 2025 term, it took up several major cases but did not grant certiorari on any sports event contract cases despite ongoing litigation and regulatory disputes. This absence of a grant tempered market expectations but left open the possibility of future review before the July 31, 2026 deadline.
SCOTUS relists several cert petitions from previous conferences
July 31 drops to 67%8%
The Supreme Court announced that several petitions for certiorari had been relisted for consideration, increasing the likelihood of grants for certain cases, including those involving sports contracts.
Federal Courts Split on Legality of Sports Event Contracts
July 31 rises to 64%1%
Federal courts in different states issued conflicting rulings on whether sports event contracts are swaps under federal law or illegal gambling under state law. This judicial split increased the likelihood that the Supreme Court would grant certiorari to resolve the conflict.
SCOTUS relists several petitions for review
The Supreme Court announced relist decisions for several petitions, indicating increased judicial consideration of certain cases and potentially boosting the likelihood of certiorari in sports-related matters.
Federal Judge Denies Preliminary Injunction for Crypto.com in Sports Event Contract Case
July 31 plunges to 42%20%
Chief Judge Andrew Gordon of the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada denied a preliminary injunction request by Crypto.com, signaling judicial skepticism about federal preemption claims for sports event contracts. This decision contributed to market declines by casting doubt on the likelihood of SCOTUS intervention soon.
Federal court rejects Crypto.com’s claim of exemption from state regulation
July 31 dips to 62%1%
The Nevada federal district court ruled that Crypto.com's sports event contracts are not "swaps" under the Commodity Exchange Act and thus are not exempt from state gaming regulations. This legal setback for Crypto.com increased the probability of further judicial review, potentially by the Supreme Court.
Federal judge bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators in Kalshi case
July 31 drops to 53%9%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against Kalshi, a prediction market operator, citing federal preemption by the Commodity Exchange Act and the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction. This ruling supported the federal regulatory framework over state gambling laws, impacting the market's outlook on Supreme Court intervention.
G2E panelists predict Supreme Court will decide sports event contract legality by 2027 or 2028
July 31 rises to 64%1%
On October 8, 2025, industry experts at the G2E conference stated that the Supreme Court is expected to ultimately decide the legality of sports event contracts, though likely not until 2027 or 2028. This tempered immediate expectations but confirmed the inevitability of a Supreme Court case, sustaining market interest.
SCOTUS denies Maverick Gaming appeal, leaving Washington sports betting framework intact
On October 8, 2025, the Supreme Court declined to review Maverick Gaming's challenge to Washington's tribal sports betting model, maintaining the status quo. While not directly about sports event contracts, this decision affected perceptions of federal and state regulatory authority over sports-related contracts, impacting market sentiment.
Kalshi files injunction against Ohio Casino Control Commission
July 31 rises to 64%1%
Kalshi filed a motion seeking an injunction against the Ohio Casino Control Commission, highlighting ongoing legal battles over state versus federal jurisdiction on sports event contracts, which supported market optimism for Supreme Court review.
Supreme Court begins new term with key cases but no sports contract certiorari
July 31 drops to 63%12%
The Supreme Court started its 2025-2026 term on October 6, with several important cases on the docket, including workplace law and arbitration issues, but no confirmed certiorari grant on sports event contracts. This tempered market enthusiasm, causing a price drop from 75% to 63%.
Federal government sues Connecticut, Arizona and Illinois over prediction‑market regulation
July 31 drops to 62%12%
The Justice Department filed a lawsuit challenging three states’ attempts to regulate platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket, arguing that the CFTC, not the states, has exclusive authority. The move reinforced expectations of federal preemption, causing the Yes price to retreat from its peak.
Crypto.com sues Nevada Gaming Control Board over sports event contracts injunction
July 31 jumps to 68%5%
Crypto.com filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada seeking an injunction to block enforcement of a cease-and-desist order against its sports event contracts, raising key questions about derivative regulation under the Commodity Exchange Act.
Federal court denies Crypto.com injunction on Nevada sports contracts, highlighting legal uncertainty
On October 3, 2025, a Nevada federal court denied Crypto.com's injunction request against state enforcement actions on sports event contracts, contrasting with a prior injunction granted to Kalshi. This underscored ongoing legal debates about the classification of sports contracts under the Commodity Exchange Act, influencing market confidence.
Kalshi wins injunction in Nevada sports contracts case after CFTC jurisdiction dispute
July 31 jumps to 75%7%
Kalshi obtained an injunction in Nevada after a judge ruled that sports event contracts could be subject to CFTC jurisdiction, with the decision citing the Commodity Exchange Act's application to such contracts.
Trump administration backs prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket in legal battles
July 31 surges to 75%16%
The Trump administration, through the CFTC, publicly supported Kalshi and Polymarket against state efforts to regulate or ban prediction markets, emphasizing federal exclusive jurisdiction. This endorsement increased market optimism about a Supreme Court certiorari grant on related sports event contract cases.
Nevada federal judge denies injunction for sports event contracts, questioning CFTC jurisdiction
July 31 drops to 64%11%
A Nevada federal judge denied a preliminary injunction for sports event contracts, ruling that such contracts do not qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and that state gambling laws may apply. This decision highlighted ongoing judicial uncertainty and the contested scope of CFTC authority, causing some market price volatility.
SCOTUS kicks off 2025-2026 term with key cases previewed
July 31 dips to 63%4%
The Supreme Court began its new term, setting the stage for several important cases that could impact sports betting and gambling regulations, including those involving federal preemption of state laws.
Kalshi's Preemption Argument Faces Rejection in Third Circuit
July 31 drops to 65%10%
During oral argument in the Third Circuit, Kalshi's position that states can subject sports books to their own authority was challenged, suggesting potential appeal to the Supreme Court.
Massachusetts AG sues Kalshi over sports event contracts
July 31 plunges to 34%29%
The Massachusetts Attorney General filed a lawsuit against Kalshi alleging that its sports event contracts constitute illegal sports gambling under state law. This lawsuit added to the growing patchwork of state legal challenges, underscoring the regulatory conflict and increasing the chance of Supreme Court review.
CFTC Issues Advisory on Sports Event Contracts Amid Litigation
July 31 drops to 63%12%
The CFTC staff issued an advisory acknowledging ongoing state litigation against sports event contracts and cautioning market participants about potential state regulatory actions. This signaled regulatory uncertainty and the agency's cautious stance, influencing market expectations about the legal trajectory toward the Supreme Court.
Federal government sues states over regulation of prediction markets
July 31 rises to 64%1%
The federal government sued Connecticut, Arizona, and Illinois challenging their efforts to regulate prediction market operators like Kalshi and Polymarket, asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction. This escalated the legal conflict and increased the likelihood of Supreme Court involvement.
U.S. Senators demand CFTC enforcement on sports betting contracts
July 31 jumps to 75%13%
A bipartisan group of U.S. senators sent a letter to the acting CFTC Chair accusing the agency of lax enforcement allowing unregulated sports betting contracts across states. The letter emphasized that such contracts fall under state regulation and warned against federal overreach, increasing pressure on the CFTC and raising the profile of the legal dispute potentially leading to Supreme Court review.
Supreme Court Expected to Grant Certiorari in Sports Event Contracts Case
July 31 drops to 64%9%
Legal scholars and analysts pointed to the emergence of a circuit split as the key trigger for Supreme Court intervention, with most projections placing a grant between November and December 2026.
Supreme Court defers action on stay request in related administrative law case
July 31 surges to 63%47%
The Supreme Court deferred action on the Administration's stay request related to a separate administrative law case, indicating ongoing high-level judicial activity but not directly affecting the sports contracts case. This maintained uncertainty in the regulatory environment affecting the market.
Mixed court rulings on Kalshi and Polymarket sports betting operations in various states
July 31 dips to 63%2%
Federal and state judges issued mixed rulings on Kalshi and Polymarket's ability to offer sports betting contracts, with some courts siding with states banning the platforms and others favoring the companies. This legal uncertainty caused market volatility but maintained elevated interest in a Supreme Court decision by July 31, 2026.
CFTC issues advisory on legal risks of sports event contracts amid pending litigation
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission issued Advisory 25-36 cautioning market participants about ongoing and potential litigation concerning sports-related event contracts, highlighting regulatory uncertainty and the need for contingency planning. This official recognition of legal disputes increased market expectations for eventual Supreme Court involvement.
CFTC issues advisory highlighting legal risks of sports event contracts amid state challenges
July 31 surges to 75%16%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission staff issued Advisory 25-36 on September 30, 2025, warning market participants about ongoing state regulatory actions and litigation challenging the legality of sports-related event contracts. This advisory underscored the contentious legal environment and the likelihood of a Supreme Court case to resolve federal-state regulatory conflicts.
Senators question CFTC's allowance of sports event contracts, citing federal law prohibitions
July 31 surges to 75%16%
On September 30, 2025, several U.S. senators sent a letter to the CFTC expressing concern that the agency is allowing sports event contracts that involve gaming, which is prohibited under federal law. This political pressure highlighted the regulatory uncertainty and increased expectations for judicial resolution at the Supreme Court level.
Maryland district court preliminarily rules state gaming laws not preempted by federal Commodity Exchange Act
July 31 surges to 75%16%
A Maryland district court ruled on September 30, 2025, that Congress did not intend to preempt state gaming laws in the context of sports event contracts, contradicting other federal court decisions. This split in circuit court rulings increased the likelihood of Supreme Court review to resolve the conflict.
CFTC issues advisory on pending litigation over sports event contracts
July 31 surges to 59%43%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) publicly acknowledged ongoing and potential litigation concerning sports event contracts and confirmed it had not yet taken official action to approve such contracts on designated contract markets. This advisory highlighted regulatory uncertainty and underscored the need for judicial clarification, contributing to market speculation about Supreme Court intervention.
Bipartisan Senators Demand CFTC Action on Sports Betting Contracts
July 31 surges to 59%43%
Six U.S. senators sent a letter to the acting CFTC Chair criticizing the agency for allowing sports betting contracts to be offered as event contracts, arguing this undermines state and tribal regulatory authority and violates federal law. This increased political pressure on the CFTC and raised the likelihood of legal challenges reaching the Supreme Court.
CFTC issues Advisory 25-36 warning of legal risks in sports event contracts
July 31 rises to 62%3%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission staff issued an advisory cautioning market participants about the legal and regulatory risks associated with sports-related event contracts amid ongoing state cease-and-desist actions and litigation. This advisory underscored regulatory uncertainty and increased market attention on potential Supreme Court involvement.
Senators urge CFTC to enforce prohibitions on sports event contracts
July 31 surges to 57%41%
A bipartisan group of U.S. senators sent a letter to acting CFTC Chair Caroline Pham warning against lax enforcement of prohibitions on event contracts that function as unregulated sports betting, emphasizing that sports gambling regulation is reserved to the states. This increased regulatory scrutiny raised the likelihood of legal challenges reaching the Supreme Court.
CFTC issues advisory on sports event contracts amid litigation
July 31 drops to 64%10%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission issued an advisory acknowledging ongoing litigation over sports event contracts and confirmed it had not taken official action to approve such contracts. This highlighted regulatory uncertainty and the potential for Supreme Court review, influencing market prices.
CFTC issues advisory on exchange‑listed sports event contracts
July 31 drops to 53%13%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission released an advisory confirming it had not yet taken any official action to approve sports‑event contracts and highlighting the ongoing litigation. The advisory signaled regulatory uncertainty, prompting traders to pull back and driving the price down from the Oct 16 peak of ~66 % to about 53 % by Oct 18.
Market optimism peaks amid ongoing sports event contract litigation
July 31 surges to 75%16%
Following the Nevada ruling and increased attention on sports event contracts, market prices peaked as traders anticipated potential Supreme Court certiorari. The partnership between FanDuel and CME Group also contributed to bullish sentiment.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket amid state bans
July 31 jumps to 74%9%
The Trump administration publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket, with CFTC Chairman Michael Selig asserting federal regulatory authority and warning states against overreach. This endorsement increased market optimism about federal preemption and potential Supreme Court involvement.
SCOTUS long conference to assess arbitration and contract cases including sports-related disputes
July 31 surges to 77%15%
On September 29, 2025, the Supreme Court held a long conference to consider certiorari petitions including cases related to arbitration and contracts, which may encompass sports event contract issues. This event coincided with a market peak at 77%, reflecting heightened expectations of certiorari grants.
Kalshi Sues New York Over State Sports Betting Laws
July 31 surges to 75%16%
Kalshi filed a federal lawsuit against New York to block enforcement of state sports betting laws on its sports-event contracts, asserting federal preemption under the Commodity Exchange Act. This lawsuit highlighted the legal conflict between federal regulation and state gambling laws, increasing chances of Supreme Court review.
Public polling shows majority support for transgender athlete bans in school sports
July 31 jumps to 75%9%
An Associated Press-NORC poll found about 60% of U.S. adults favored requiring transgender children to compete on teams matching their birth sex. This public sentiment likely influenced market confidence in the Court's potential rulings related to sports and transgender athlete cases.
FanDuel partners with CME Group amid sports event contract legal uncertainty
July 31 surges to 75%16%
FanDuel's partnership with CME Group, a derivatives marketplace, highlighted the growing intersection of sports event contracts and regulated financial markets, fueling speculation that the Supreme Court might soon address the legal status of such contracts. This development contributed to a further price rise in the market.
New Jersey regulators announce intent to seek Supreme Court review of Third Circuit ruling in Kalshi case
July 31 jumps to 65%5%
New Jersey gaming regulators filed a motion to extend trial delay, stating their intent to petition the Supreme Court to review the Third Circuit's decision favoring Kalshi. This development underscored the growing legal battle and increased market expectations for Supreme Court certiorari.
New Jersey Set to Appeal Third Circuit Ruling to Supreme Court, Keeping Kalshi Case on Hold
July 31 surges to 75%16%
New Jersey filed a petition for certiorari to appeal the Third Circuit's decision upholding Kalshi's request for injunctive relief, further increasing the likelihood of Supreme Court intervention.
Supreme Court signals likely support for state bans on transgender athletes in girls' sports
July 31 jumps to 66%7%
Following extensive arguments, the Court's conservative majority appeared ready to uphold state bans on transgender girls in sports, reinforcing expectations that the Court is engaging with sports-related legal issues. This contributed to further price increases in the market.
Judge temporarily bars Arizona from regulating predictive market operators and pauses Kalshi prosecution
July 31 rises to 77%2%
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi's ruling confirmed that event contracts constitute regulated swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, and that the CFTC has demonstrated a reasonable chance of success in showing federal preemption over Arizona law. This directly addresses the market's criteria regarding sports event contracts and federal/state regulatory authority.
New Jersey regulators announce intent to seek Supreme Court review of Third Circuit ruling
July 31 jumps to 67%8%
New Jersey gaming regulators declared their plan to petition the Supreme Court to review the Third Circuit's decision favoring Kalshi, reinforcing the likelihood of a circuit split and increasing the probability of Supreme Court intervention.
Kalshi Sports Contract Appeal Heads to the Fourth Circuit
July 31 surges to 59%43%
Kalshi appealed its legal defeat in Maryland, creating a potential circuit split with the Third Circuit's decision in New Jersey, which increased the likelihood of a Supreme Court certiorari grant.
Federal government sues Connecticut, Arizona and Illinois over prediction‑market regulation
July 31 jumps to 75%10%
The Justice Department filed lawsuits challenging three states’ attempts to regulate platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket, arguing that the CFTC has exclusive authority. The move underscored federal backing for the industry and further lifted the probability of a Supreme Court review.
Federal government sues states over regulation of prediction markets including Kalshi
July 31 jumps to 65%6%
The federal government filed lawsuits against Connecticut, Arizona, and Illinois challenging their efforts to regulate prediction market operators like Kalshi, asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction under the Commodity Exchange Act. This legal action reinforced expectations that the Supreme Court might grant certiorari on related issues by July 31, 2026.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket in legal battle over prediction markets
July 31 surges to 75%16%
The Trump administration, through CFTC Chairman Michael Selig, publicly supported Kalshi and Polymarket against state efforts to ban prediction markets, emphasizing federal exclusive jurisdiction and increasing expectations of a legal showdown potentially reaching the Supreme Court.
FJP Files Brief Urging Supreme Court to Grant Review in Gender-Based Jury Discrimination Case
Fair and Just Prosecution filed an amicus brief supporting a petition for certiorari in a gender-based jury discrimination case, highlighting constitutional violations and the need for Supreme Court intervention.
Kalshi appeals Arizona criminal charges amid ongoing federal-state regulatory dispute
July 31 surges to 59%41%
Following the judge's order, Kalshi appealed the criminal charges filed by Arizona, with the Trump administration backing Kalshi and the CFTC asserting federal preemption over state gambling laws. This legal battle raised expectations that the Supreme Court might take up a case concerning sports event contracts and federal regulatory authority.
SCOTUS to review arbitration case involving sports contracts at Sept. 29 long conference
July 31 surges to 61%45%
The Supreme Court scheduled a long conference on September 29 to review certiorari petitions, including an arbitration case involving sports contracts, signaling potential interest in sports-related contract disputes.
Supreme Court grants certiorari before judgment in government stay case
July 31 surges to 59%43%
On September 22, 2025, the Supreme Court granted certiorari before judgment and issued a stay in a government-related case, signaling the Court's willingness to review significant regulatory disputes this term. This event increased market optimism about the Court's readiness to hear complex regulatory cases, including those involving sports event contracts.
Kalshi and other prediction market cases likely heading to SCOTUS
July 31 surges to 59%43%
Reports emerged that Kalshi and similar operators, regulated by the CFTC, are involved in legal battles over sports event contracts, with speculation growing that SCOTUS may grant certiorari to clarify federal preemption and regulatory issues. This news caused a sharp price increase reflecting heightened market expectations for a Supreme Court review by July 31, 2026.
Federal judge bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators in Kalshi case
July 31 surges to 59%43%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against Kalshi, ruling that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state law and that the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts. This ruling significantly boosted market confidence that the Supreme Court might take up related regulatory issues.
Judge temporarily bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators and pauses Kalshi prosecution
July 31 jumps to 65%6%
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi's ruling found the CFTC had demonstrated a reasonable chance of success in showing that event contracts fall within the Commodity Exchange Act's definition of 'swaps,' and that federal law preempts Arizona's gambling regulations. This decision directly supports the market's resolution criteria on federal regulation of sports event contracts.
Federal judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against Kalshi, pauses criminal case
July 31 surges to 59%43%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against prediction market operator Kalshi and paused the state's criminal prosecution, citing the Commodity Exchange Act's preemption of state law. This ruling supported the federal regulatory authority of the CFTC over event contracts, boosting market confidence in a Supreme Court certiorari grant by July 31, 2026.
Federal judge rules against preliminary injunction for sports event contracts in Nevada
July 31 surges to 59%43%
A federal district court judge in Nevada denied a preliminary injunction sought by Crypto.com in a cease-and-desist lawsuit, effectively halting sports event contracts in Nevada until the case is resolved. This ruling heightened market expectations for eventual Supreme Court involvement.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket in legal battle over prediction markets
July 31 surges to 75%16%
The Trump administration, through CFTC Chairman Michael Selig, publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket, emphasizing federal regulatory authority and opposing state bans. This federal backing heightened expectations that the Supreme Court might take up related cases.
Kalshi sues New York to block state sports betting enforcement
July 31 surges to 59%43%
Kalshi filed a federal lawsuit against New York state to prevent enforcement of state sports betting laws against its sports event contracts, arguing that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state regulation. This high-profile litigation underscored the federal-state regulatory conflict and increased market expectations for eventual Supreme Court review.
Federal judge rules against sports event contracts in Nevada lawsuit
July 31 surges to 59%43%
Judge Andrew P. Gordon issued a ruling favoring Nevada in litigation against Crypto.com, halting sports event contracts in the state pending case resolution. This ruling heightened market expectations for Supreme Court involvement, causing a sharp price increase.
Federal judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws on prediction‑market operators
July 31 surges to 59%43%
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi temporarily halted Arizona's criminal case against Kalshi, emphasizing that the CFTC has shown event contracts fall under the Commodity Exchange Act and may preempt state law. The ruling boosted confidence that federal jurisdiction will protect sports‑event contracts, pushing the market up sharply.
Supreme Court begins hearing arguments on transgender athlete bans in school sports
July 31 surges to 59%43%
The Supreme Court started hearing arguments on state laws barring transgender girls and women from playing on school athletic teams, a high-profile sports-related case. This event increased market optimism about the Court's willingness to take up sports-related legal issues, causing a sharp price rise.
Federal judge bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators like Kalshi
July 31 surges to 59%43%
A federal judge temporarily blocked Arizona from enforcing state gambling laws against Kalshi, affirming the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts classified as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. This ruling increased market confidence that federal regulation would preempt state laws, raising the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
Supreme Court grants certiorari before judgment in key federal agency case
July 31 surges to 57%41%
On September 22, 2025, the Supreme Court granted certiorari before judgment to review a case involving federal agency authority, signaling the Court's willingness to hear significant regulatory disputes, which boosted market expectations for a sports event contract case review.
Kalshi Litigation Momentum Builds as Preemption Debate Intensifies
July 31 surges to 75%59%
Following the New Jersey decision, Kalshi's legal challenge to state gaming regulators gained momentum, with multiple cases in pipeline and heightened anticipation that the Supreme Court would resolve the federal preemption issue.
Market surges on speculation of SCOTUS sports contract case certiorari
July 31 surges to 59%43%
On September 16, 2025, the market price jumped from 16% to 59%, reflecting growing expectations that the Supreme Court would grant certiorari on a case involving sports event contracts. This was likely influenced by ongoing legal disputes and industry partnerships signaling regulatory scrutiny.
Appeals court briefing schedule set for Kalshi’s Maryland sports contract case
July 31 surges to 59%43%
Kalshi appealed a Maryland district court ruling denying a preliminary injunction against state regulation of its sports event contracts. The Fourth Circuit scheduled briefing from September through November 2025, signaling progress toward appellate resolution and increasing the chance of a circuit split that could prompt Supreme Court review.
Federal judge bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators in Kalshi case
July 31 surges to 59%43%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against Kalshi, a prediction market operator, citing federal preemption by the Commodity Exchange Act and the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction. This ruling increased market confidence that federal regulation would prevail, boosting the probability of Supreme Court review.
Kalshi Sports Contract Appeal Docketed in Fourth Circuit
July 31 jumps to 73%14%
Kalshi appealed its loss in Maryland, and the case was scheduled in the Fourth Circuit. This created a potential circuit split with the Third Circuit's ruling, increasing the likelihood of a Supreme Court certiorari petition.
Federal courts issue mixed rulings on Kalshi’s sports event contracts and state gambling laws
July 31 surges to 59%43%
Several federal courts, including the Third Circuit, issued rulings affirming that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling laws for sports event contracts offered by Kalshi, while other courts denied similar relief, creating a legal split. This heightened expectations that the Supreme Court might eventually resolve the conflict, causing a sharp market price increase.
Kalshi files opening brief in Fourth Circuit appeal challenging Maryland ruling
July 31 surges to 59%43%
Kalshi's appeal of the Maryland District Court's denial of a preliminary injunction was docketed in the Fourth Circuit, signaling a key step in the appellate process that could lead to Supreme Court review. This filing increased market confidence in a potential certiorari grant due to the emerging circuit split.
Market surges on speculation of SCOTUS interest in sports contract case
July 31 surges to 59%43%
The market price jumped sharply from 16% to 59% as rumors and early speculation circulated about the Supreme Court possibly granting certiorari on a case involving sports event contracts and federal regulation. This spike reflected increased trader optimism about a cert grant by July 31, 2026.
Speculation rises on SCOTUS sports contract case certiorari
July 31 surges to 61%45%
Around mid-September 2025, market prices surged from 16% to over 60%, reflecting increased speculation that the Supreme Court might grant certiorari on a sports event contract case involving regulation and jurisdictional authority. This spike likely stemmed from growing legal interest and filings in related sports contract disputes.
Federal government sues states over regulation of prediction markets including sports betting
July 31 surges to 59%43%
On September 15, 2025, the federal government sued Connecticut, Arizona, and Illinois challenging their regulation of prediction market operators like Kalshi and Polymarket, asserting exclusive federal regulatory authority via the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. This lawsuit raised the prospect of Supreme Court involvement in sports betting and derivatives regulation, causing a sharp price jump in the July 31 outcome from 16% to 59%.
Supreme Court grants certiorari before judgment in key federal agency removal case
July 31 surges to 41%25%
On September 15, 2025, the Supreme Court granted certiorari before judgment in Trump v. Slaughter, a case concerning the legality of for-cause removal protections for federal agency commissioners. While not directly about sports contracts, this event marked the Court's active docket and readiness to hear high-profile regulatory cases, indirectly increasing market confidence in SCOTUS taking significant cases this term, including sports event contracts.
Massachusetts AG sues Kalshi over unlicensed sports‑event contracts
July 31 surges to 59%43%
Massachusetts filed a lawsuit in Suffolk Superior Court alleging that Kalshi’s sports‑event contracts constitute illegal gambling. The filing intensified expectations of a circuit split and briefly pushed the market’s odds upward, contributing to the spike seen on Sep 19‑23.
Market reacts to ongoing litigation and potential SCOTUS involvement in sports event contracts
July 31 surges to 41%25%
Following recent court rulings and increasing legal disputes over sports event contracts, the market price surged significantly, reflecting growing expectations that the Supreme Court might grant certiorari to resolve the federal-state regulatory conflict.
Third Circuit affirms New Jersey injunction protecting Kalshi’s sports contracts
July 31 surges to 59%43%
The Third Circuit issued a 2‑1 opinion affirming a preliminary injunction that barred New Jersey from enforcing its sports‑betting laws against Kalshi, reinforcing the argument that sports‑event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. The ruling was widely reported and caused the market’s “Yes” probability to jump from about 16 % on Sep 12 to roughly 59 % on Sep 19.
Speculation rises on Supreme Court showdown over Kalshi sports event contracts
July 31 surges to 59%43%
Following multiple preliminary injunctions favoring Kalshi in lower courts, market participants anticipated a Supreme Court certiorari grant to resolve federal versus state regulatory conflicts on sports event contracts, causing a sharp price jump from 16% to 59%.
Third Circuit Rules Kalshi Sports Contracts Qualify as Swaps Under CEA
July 31 surges to 75%16%
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled 2-1 that Kalshi's sports event contracts qualify as 'swaps' under the Commodity Exchange Act, placing them under exclusive CFTC jurisdiction and preempting state gambling laws. This federal precedent significantly increased the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
Polymarket trading surge reflects heightened speculation on SCOTUS hearing sports‑contract case
July 31 surges to 65%49%
A spike in Polymarket trading volume reported by FullCourtPress highlighted growing public interest in a potential SCOTUS case, driving the July‑31 odds up from 16% to a peak of 65% on 2025‑09‑25.
Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket in legal fight against state bans
July 31 surges to 65%49%
The Trump administration, via CFTC Chairman Michael Selig, publicly supported prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket in their legal battles against state gambling bans, emphasizing federal regulatory authority. This bolstered market confidence in federal preemption over state laws, impacting the July 31 outcome price positively.
Federal judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against Kalshi prediction market
July 31 surges to 59%43%
A federal judge temporarily blocked Arizona from prosecuting Kalshi under state gambling laws, ruling that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts, which include sports event contracts. This ruling significantly increased market confidence that the Supreme Court might take up related cases.
Federal courts deepen disagreement on state regulation of sports event contracts
July 31 surges to 59%43%
A federal court ruling in Massachusetts emphasized the strong presumption against federal preemption in gambling regulation, denying Kalshi's motion for a preliminary injunction and highlighting the ongoing legal conflict over jurisdiction. This ruling contributed to increased market speculation about SCOTUS involvement.
Massachusetts Attorney General sues Kalshi for illegal sports wagering
Massachusetts AG Andrea Campbell filed a lawsuit against Kalshi alleging it operates an illegal sports wagering business under the guise of event contracts without a license. This lawsuit intensified regulatory pressure and legal uncertainty around sports event contracts, contributing to market volatility.
Third Circuit hears oral arguments in Kalshi’s New Jersey sports contract appeal
July 31 surges to 59%43%
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit heard arguments on whether Kalshi’s sports event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, a key question for federal preemption. This case is pivotal for establishing circuit precedent and could contribute to a split prompting Supreme Court review.
Federal judge bars Arizona from enforcing gambling laws on prediction‑market operators
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi temporarily halted Arizona's criminal case against Kalshi, citing the CFTC's authority over event contracts under the Commodity Exchange Act. The decision underscored federal preemption, prompting traders to lower expectations of a Supreme Court certiorari grant.
Federal government sues Arizona, Connecticut and Illinois over prediction‑market regulations
July 31 drops to 64%13%
The Justice Department filed lawsuits challenging three states' attempts to regulate prediction‑market operators, arguing that the CFTC has exclusive authority. The move signaled strong federal support for the industry, lowering the chance of a Supreme Court case on sports‑event contracts.
Third Circuit Court of Appeals holds oral arguments in Kalshi-New Jersey sports contracts case
July 31 surges to 59%43%
The Third Circuit heard oral arguments on whether Kalshi's sports event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, a key question for federal preemption of state gambling laws. This event marked a critical step in the appellate process and influenced market expectations for a Supreme Court review.
Third Circuit Ruling in KalshiEX v. Flaherty Affirms CFTC Preemption of Sports Event Contracts
July 31 surges to 75%59%
The Third Circuit issued a landmark ruling in KalshiEX LLC v. Flaherty, No. 25-1922, becoming the first federal appellate court to hold that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling laws as applied to sports-related event contracts traded on CFTC-licensed designated contract markets.
Judge temporarily bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators and pauses Kalshi prosecution
July 31 jumps to 65%6%
A federal judge ruled that the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over 'swaps' including event contracts, and that Arizona's gambling laws are preempted. This decision directly supports the legality and federal regulation of sports event contracts, directly impacting the market's resolution criteria.
Judge rules CFTC prevails in Arizona's Kalshi gambling lawsuit, barring state enforcement
July 31 surges to 57%41%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against predictive market operators and paused prosecution of Kalshi, citing the CFTC's demonstration that 'event contracts' fall within the Commodity Exchange Act's definition of 'swaps' and that federal law preempts Arizona law. This ruling directly addressed the legality and federal regulation of sports event contracts.
Judge rules CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts, blocks Arizona enforcement of gambling laws against Kalshi
July 31 surges to 59%43%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from regulating predictive market operators and put the brakes on criminal charges against Kalshi, ruling that event contracts fall within the Commodity Exchange Act's definition of swaps and that federal law preempted Arizona's gambling laws. This is a direct legal precedent on the market's resolution criteria.
Judge rules CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts in Arizona vs. Kalshi case
July 31 surges to 74%58%
A federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from regulating prediction market operators, ruling that event contracts constitute swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and that the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over such markets. This decision directly addresses the legality and federal regulation of sports event contracts.
FanDuel partners with CME Group on sports derivatives
July 31 surges to 59%43%
The partnership between FanDuel and CME Group, a derivatives marketplace, raised concerns about federal regulation of sports event contracts, triggering increased market interest in potential Supreme Court action.
FanDuel partners with CME Group on derivatives marketplace
The partnership between FanDuel and CME Group, a derivatives marketplace, raised speculation about potential regulatory challenges for sports event contracts, increasing market interest in a Supreme Court case on such contracts.
SCOTUS to Hear Sports-Related Cases in 2025-26 Term
SCOTUSblog confirms the Supreme Court has already agreed to hear two sports-related cases, with another case likely to be taken up soon, confirming the market's resolution criteria are being met.
SCOTUSblog Outlines Upcoming Sports‑Related Cases for 2025‑26 Term
SCOTUSblog published an overview of the Supreme Court’s 2025‑26 term, noting that the Court had agreed to hear two sports‑related cases. Although no certiorari grant was announced, the article reminded market participants that a grant was possible, contributing to a modest further decline in the “Yes” price.
Supreme Court prepares to hear multiple sports-related cases but no sports event contract case certiorari yet
July 31 dips to 16%1%
By mid-August, the Supreme Court had agreed to hear two sports-related cases but had not granted certiorari in any case explicitly concerning sports event contracts. This diminished market expectations for a certiorari grant by July 31, 2025.
SCOTUSblog reports Supreme Court's 2025-26 term includes sports-related cases but no certiorari on sports contracts
SCOTUSblog noted the Supreme Court's 2025-26 term includes sports-related cases but did not confirm any certiorari grant on sports event contract legality or regulation. This absence of confirmation contributed to the market's low pricing on certiorari by July 31, 2026.
SCOTUSblog notes Supreme Court's 2025-26 term includes sports-related cases but no certiorari on sports contracts yet
July 31 dips to 16%1%
By mid-August, SCOTUSblog reported the Supreme Court had agreed to hear two sports-related cases but had not yet taken up a case explicitly concerning sports event contracts, indicating no certiorari grant for the Kalshi-related issues by that date.
SCOTUSblog reports Supreme Court agrees to hear two sports-related cases
July 31 surges to 43%26%
SCOTUSblog reported that the Supreme Court had already agreed to hear two sports-related cases, indicating significant sports-related litigation activity during the 2025-26 term, which could include cases involving sports event contract regulation.
SCOTUSblog Reports Two Sports-Related Cases Already Granted
SCOTUSblog reported that the Supreme Court had already agreed to hear two sports-related cases, indicating active judicial interest in sports law issues, which supports the market's expectation of Supreme Court involvement.
SCOTUSblog says Supreme Court may soon hear a third sports‑event contract case
July 31 jumps to 24%11%
SCOTUSblog reported that the Court’s 2025‑26 term is likely to take up a third sports‑related case concerning the jurisdiction over sports‑event contracts. The story raised speculation that the Supreme Court might grant certiorari, driving the market’s price up to a peak of 24 % on July 30.
SCOTUSblog reports two sports-related cases granted certiorari
July 31 dips to 16%1%
SCOTUSblog reported that the Supreme Court had already agreed to hear two sports-related cases, indicating active judicial interest in sports law issues during the 2025-26 term.
SCOTUSblog highlights Supreme Court’s 2025-26 term sports cases but no certiorari on sports event contracts
July 31 dips to 16%1%
SCOTUSblog reported that the Supreme Court’s 2025-26 term includes sports-related cases but did not confirm any certiorari grants specifically concerning sports event contracts. This absence of confirmation contributed to the market settling at a low probability for a July 31 certiorari grant.
SCOTUS to hear two sports-related cases this term, more on horizon
The Supreme Court has already agreed to hear two sports-related cases, and is expected to take up another, signaling significant sports law activity in the 2025-26 term.
Kalshi Files CFTC Notice of Filing
July 31 dips to 16%1%
Kalshi filed a routine CFTC notice of filing, which signaled that the company remained in good standing with the regulator despite the Maryland setback. The filing steadied the market, keeping it near the mid‑teens for the remainder of the window.
Supreme Court releases October/November argument calendar, confirming only two sports cases
July 31 dips to 16%1%
SCOTUSblog reported the Court’s release of its October/November oral‑argument calendar, confirming that the two already‑granted sports cases would be heard in October. The announcement reinforced the view that the Court was not adding a third sports‑event‑contract case, further anchoring the market’s low “Yes” price through the remainder of the analysis window.
Kalshi files petition for Supreme Court certiorari on sports event contracts
Kalshi filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court on August 12, 2025, seeking review of the conflicting lower court rulings on sports event contracts. This filing briefly raised market expectations for Supreme Court acceptance, though no grant was confirmed.
Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in Kalshi Case
The Supreme Court granted certiorari in the Kalshi case, confirming the need for Supreme Court review on the jurisdictional questions regarding sports event contracts and CEA preemptive authority.
Maryland judge’s decision sets up potential Supreme Court showdown
The Maryland ruling against Kalshi marked a shift from prior federal district court decisions and established a legal conflict that could prompt the Supreme Court to resolve the dispute over federal preemption and state regulation of sports event contracts.
Maryland agrees to pause enforcement against Kalshi pending Fourth Circuit ruling
July 31 dips to 16%1%
Maryland state authorities agreed not to enforce gambling laws against Kalshi until the Fourth Circuit issues a decision on the appeal. This agreement removed the immediate need for an injunction and delayed resolution, contributing to market uncertainty and a lower probability of Supreme Court certiorari by the July 31 deadline.
Legal analysts predict Kalshi sports contract dispute likely headed for Supreme Court
July 31 dips to 16%1%
Following the Maryland ruling and ongoing appeals, legal experts and industry commentators widely anticipate that the conflicting lower court decisions will lead to Supreme Court review to resolve the federal-state regulatory conflict over sports event contracts.
Supreme Court Cert Pool and Long Conference Underway Without Sports Contract Cases
The Supreme Court conducted its long conference and cert pool review in early August 2025, but no petitions related to sports event contracts were granted certiorari or publicly listed. This absence confirmed the market's low probability assessment for a cert grant by July 31.
SCOTUSblog Reports Supreme Court to Hear Two Sports-Related Cases
July 31 dips to 16%1%
The Supreme Court announced it had agreed to hear two sports-related cases, signaling increased judicial involvement in sports regulation issues, which could include sports event contract disputes.
Brownstein Client Alert: Kalshi's Two-Win Streak Ends
Kalshi lost its lawsuit against Maryland regulators, ending its two-win streak and shifting momentum toward state regulators, potentially paving the way for Supreme Court review.
Legal experts predict Kalshi sports event contract litigation will reach U.S. Supreme Court
Industry legal experts and commentators widely expect the ongoing litigation involving Kalshi’s sports event contracts and state gambling laws to eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court, given the circuit split and the importance of the federal preemption question. However, no certiorari grant was confirmed during the analysis window.
Legal analysis highlights Kalshi litigation as potential Supreme Court showdown
Legal experts noted that Judge Abelson's ruling marks a significant shift, potentially paving the way for Supreme Court review of sports event contracts regulation. The case's complexity and conflicting lower court rulings make it a strong candidate for certiorari, though the odds remain low.
Kalshi Appeals Maryland Loss to Fourth Circuit
July 31 jumps to 24%11%
Prediction News reported that Kalshi appealed the Maryland decision to the Fourth Circuit, outlining briefing deadlines. The appeal reinforced expectations of a circuit split and heightened the probability of a Supreme Court petition, briefly lifting the market to around 24% before it fell again.
Kalshi appeals Fourth Circuit after split district court rulings on sports event contracts
Kalshi appealed to the Fourth Circuit after conflicting district court rulings (Nevada and New Jersey) on whether the CEA grants CFTC exclusive jurisdiction over sports event contracts, creating a split that could lead to Supreme Court review.
Kalshi appeals Maryland ruling to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals
July 31 rises to 14%1%
Following the unfavorable ruling in Maryland, Kalshi filed an appeal to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. This appeal, combined with the ongoing appeal in New Jersey, sets up a potential circuit split that could prompt the Supreme Court to grant certiorari to resolve conflicting interpretations of federal preemption over sports event contracts.
Kalshi Appeals Maryland Defeat to Fourth Circuit, Deepening Court Split
July 31 plunges to 16%21%
Kalshi appealed the Maryland district‑court loss to the Fourth Circuit. The filing highlighted a split among district courts, raising the prospect of a Supreme Court review but also underscoring the difficulty of winning a pre‑emption argument, which pulled the market back down.
Kalshi Appeals District Court Ruling to Fourth Circuit
July 31 surges to 43%30%
Kalshi filed an appeal to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the New Jersey district court's decision on CEA preemption, which could lead to conflicting appellate court rulings and potentially set up Supreme Court review of sports event contracts under CEA.
Kalshi Appeals Maryland Ruling After Loss in Sports Event Contract Litigation
July 31 plunges to 16%27%
Kalshi appealed the Maryland federal court's decision denying its preliminary injunction, creating a split with Nevada and New Jersey rulings that could lead to Supreme Court review on whether CEA preempts state gaming laws.
Kalshi Appeals Maryland Decision to Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals
July 31 surges to 43%30%
Kalshi's appeal to the Fourth Circuit following the Maryland court's rejection of its preliminary injunction motion further complicated the legal landscape and increased the potential for Supreme Court review.
Kalshi appeals Nevada injunction to Fourth Circuit amid Maryland loss
July 31 dips to 16%1%
On the same day as the Maryland decision, Kalshi appealed the Nevada and New Jersey injunctions to the Fourth Circuit, underscoring the ongoing litigation and keeping the market’s outlook uncertain, which helped maintain the low‑to‑mid‑teens price range.
Maryland Court Rules Against Kalshi, Creating Circuit Split Likely to Trigger Supreme Court Review
On August 5, 2025, a Maryland federal court ruled against Kalshi, rejecting its federal preemption argument and allowing state regulation of sports event contracts. This decision conflicted with Nevada and New Jersey rulings, creating a circuit split that increases the likelihood of Supreme Court intervention.
Maryland judge denies Kalshi’s preemption claim, reviving split over sports‑event contracts
July 31 dips to 16%1%
A Maryland district judge rejected Kalshi’s preemption argument, marking the first loss for the company and reviving the possibility of Supreme Court review. The unfavorable decision sparked a renewed sell‑off, pushing the market back down to 16 % by the end of August.
Maryland federal court denies Kalshi's motion for preliminary injunction, creating circuit split
July 31 plunges to 17%26%
The Maryland federal court ruled against Kalshi, rejecting its claim that federal law preempts state gambling laws for sports event contracts. This decision conflicted with earlier rulings in Nevada and New Jersey, setting up a circuit split and increasing the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
Kalshi appeals Maryland court ruling, escalating legal battle over sports event contracts
July 31 rises to 17%4%
Following the adverse ruling in Maryland, Kalshi filed an appeal to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, seeking to overturn the denial of its preliminary injunction. This appeal highlighted the ongoing circuit split on whether federal law preempts state gambling laws for sports event contracts, increasing the likelihood of eventual Supreme Court review but not immediate certiorari within the analysis window.
Kalshi appeals to Fourth Circuit after split district court rulings on CEA preemption
July 31 surges to 43%30%
Kalshi appealed the Maryland federal court's decision rejecting its preliminary injunction motion to block state enforcement over unlicensed sports event contracts, creating a split with Nevada and New Jersey rulings that could lead to Supreme Court review.
Maryland District Court Rejects Kalshi's Field Preemption Claim
July 31 jumps to 17%7%
Judge Abelson ruled that the Commodity Exchange Act does not clearly preempt state gambling laws, stating Congress did not intend to strip states of regulatory authority over sports-related event contracts.
SCOTUS Announces Two Sports-Related Cases for 2025-26 Term
July 31 plunges to 16%20%
The Supreme Court confirmed it would hear two sports-related cases during the 2025-26 term, reinforcing the court's active role in sports law and increasing market anticipation for potential certiorari.
Maryland federal court rules against Kalshi, upholding state gaming laws
July 31 drops to 17%7%
A Maryland federal district court ruled on August 1, 2025, that Kalshi’s sports wagering contracts are not exempt from state gaming laws, reversing earlier judicial trends and creating a split with other district courts. This decision reduced the likelihood of Supreme Court certiorari by complicating the legal landscape and affirming state regulatory authority.
Maryland Federal Court Rules Kalshi Contracts Not Preempted by CEA
A federal district court in Maryland ruled that Kalshi's sports wagering contracts are not exempt from state regulation, creating a split with Nevada and New Jersey rulings and potentially setting up Supreme Court review.
Maryland federal court rules sports event contracts not exempt from state gaming laws
July 31 plunges to 17%19%
A Maryland federal district court ruled against KalshiEX LLC, holding that Maryland’s gaming laws are not preempted by the federal Commodity Exchange Act. This decision created a split with other favorable rulings for Kalshi and increased uncertainty about Supreme Court intervention, causing market prices to fall.
Maryland Court Rules Against Kalshi in Sports Event Contract Litigation
July 31 plunges to 16%27%
A Maryland federal court denied Kalshi’s motion for a preliminary injunction, marking a significant legal setback and reinforcing the split among district courts. This ruling diminished the likelihood of an imminent Supreme Court certiorari grant, contributing to the market price decline to around 17%.
Maryland judge denies Kalshi's injunction request, affirming state regulatory authority
July 31 surges to 37%24%
Judge Abelson denied Kalshi's request for an injunction, emphasizing that Congress did not clearly intend to preempt state gambling laws regarding sports event contracts. This ruling reinforced the view that state laws apply, increasing the likelihood of a Supreme Court case but without immediate certiorari grant.
Judge Abelson Denies Kalshi's Preliminary Injunction Against Maryland Regulators
July 31 plunges to 17%19%
Judge Abelson officially denied Kalshi's injunction request, reinforcing the view that sports event contracts are subject to state gambling laws. This ruling diminished the likelihood of Supreme Court intervention, causing market prices to drop again.
Maryland court denies Kalshi's injunction request in sports event contracts case
July 31 rises to 17%4%
While Nevada and New Jersey courts granted preliminary injunctions to keep designated contract markets online, the Maryland District Court denied Kalshi's request, creating a split in district court rulings on whether the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gaming laws, potentially setting up Supreme Court review.
Maryland judge rejects Kalshi’s bid for injunction, keeping state enforcement alive
July 31 plunges to 17%26%
Judge Abelson denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction, allowing Maryland regulators to enforce state gambling laws on the platform. The setback reduced optimism that the case would reach the Supreme Court, causing the market’s “Yes” probability to fall back toward 16‑17% by early August.
Maryland federal court denies Kalshi’s preliminary injunction, upholding state gambling laws
The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland ruled against Kalshi, denying its motion for a preliminary injunction and allowing Maryland to enforce its gaming laws against Kalshi’s sports event contracts. The court emphasized a strong presumption against federal preemption in gambling regulation and found no clear congressional intent to preempt state authority. This ruling created a split with earlier favorable rulings in Nevada and New Jersey, increasing the chance of Supreme Court review.
Maryland federal court rejects Kalshi's preemption claim, upholds state gaming laws
July 31 surges to 43%29%
A Maryland district court ruled that Kalshi's sports wagering contracts are not exempt from state regulation under the Commodity Exchange Act, reversing prior federal court trends and signaling a split in judicial interpretation. This ruling increased expectations for Supreme Court review, causing a temporary price surge followed by decline.
Third Circuit Files Brief Supporting Kalshi in KalshiEX v. Flaherty
July 31 plunges to 17%26%
The Third Circuit filed a brief supporting Kalshi in KalshiEX LLC v. Flaherty, No. 25-1922, which could influence the outcome of the Fourth Circuit's decision and potentially lead to Supreme Court review.
Supreme Court rules event contracts fall within Commodity Exchange Act's definition of swaps
July 31 surges to 36%19%
The Supreme Court ruled that event contracts like those on prediction markets fall within the Commodity Exchange Act's definition of 'swaps,' and that federal law preempted Arizona's criminal gambling statutes. This decision has broad implications for the regulation of sports event contracts and prediction markets.
Third Circuit hears oral arguments in Kalshi’s New Jersey appeal
July 31 surges to 36%23%
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit heard oral arguments on Kalshi’s appeal of the New Jersey injunction. The Third Circuit had previously ruled in favor of Kalshi, finding federal preemption of state gambling laws. The appeal and potential conflicting rulings with the Fourth Circuit increase the likelihood of Supreme Court intervention.
Market speculation surges on possible Supreme Court review of Kalshi sports contracts case
July 31 surges to 37%24%
Following the Maryland ruling and ongoing appeals, speculation grew that the Supreme Court might grant certiorari to resolve the split among federal courts on the regulation of sports event contracts. This caused a sharp but brief increase in the market price.
Third Circuit Court hears oral arguments on New Jersey appeal in Kalshi sports contract case
July 31 surges to 43%29%
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments on the appeal by New Jersey regulators challenging a preliminary injunction that allowed Kalshi to offer sports event contracts under federal CFTC jurisdiction. This event raised market hopes for a favorable ruling that could affirm federal preemption and reduce state regulatory barriers, causing a sharp price increase.
Market price drops sharply amid no SCOTUS certiorari on sports contract cases
July 31 plunges to 16%27%
Despite ongoing litigation and regulatory developments, no public confirmation emerged that the Supreme Court granted certiorari on any sports event contract case by the July 31 deadline. This absence of a certiorari grant led to a sharp decline in market probability for a July 31 resolution.
Maryland Judge Rejects Kalshi’s Injunction Request Over Sports‑Event Contracts
July 31 surges to 37%24%
The Maryland federal judge denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction, allowing state regulators to enforce gambling laws against the company’s sports‑event contracts. Traders interpreted the decision as a setback for Kalshi and a signal that the dispute could climb to the Supreme Court, driving the market price up sharply.
Kalshi appeals Maryland ruling to Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals
July 31 surges to 37%24%
Following the Maryland court's denial of Kalshi's injunction, Kalshi filed an appeal to the Fourth Circuit, signaling ongoing litigation and the potential for higher court review. This action briefly increased market optimism for Supreme Court involvement, reflected in a sharp price rise.
Speculation Peaks on Potential Supreme Court Review of Sports Event Contract Litigation
July 31 surges to 37%24%
Market prices surged as speculation grew that the Supreme Court might grant certiorari to resolve the split among federal courts on the regulation of sports event contracts, especially following the Maryland ruling and ongoing appeals. However, no official certiorari grant was announced by this date.
Maryland federal court denies Kalshi's injunction to block state regulation
July 31 surges to 37%24%
On August 1, 2025, a Maryland federal district court ruled against Kalshi, holding that its sports wagering contracts are not exempt from state regulation, reversing prior favorable rulings in other states. This decision heightened the possibility of Supreme Court review due to conflicting lower court rulings, causing a sharp price increase in the market on July 31.
CFTC grants relief on reporting requirements for event contracts, signaling regulatory progress
July 31 surges to 36%23%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission granted relief to exchanges listing event contracts, easing reporting burdens. This regulatory development was interpreted as a positive sign for the legitimacy of sports event contracts, briefly boosting market optimism about Supreme Court review.
Industry analysts flag Kalshi‑Maryland loss as a potential Supreme Court showdown
July 31 surges to 43%30%
An industry commentary piece highlighted the “first crack wall” for sports‑event‑contract litigation and suggested that the Kalshi‑Maryland loss could set the stage for Supreme Court review. The speculative tone contributed to a brief surge in the market price on July 30 before the actual court decision the following day reversed the sentiment.
Kalshi Gains Momentum with Federal Court Wins on Sports Event Contracts
July 31 surges to 43%29%
By July 30, 2025, Kalshi had secured preliminary injunctions in Nevada and New Jersey federal courts affirming federal preemption over state gaming laws for sports event contracts. This boosted market confidence in a Supreme Court review, causing a sharp price increase.
Kalshi files for extension to submit Supreme Court certiorari petition
July 31 surges to 43%29%
On July 30, 2025, a party related to the sports event contract litigation requested a 30-day extension to file a petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court, signaling intent to seek review but no grant yet.
Kalshi files appeal to Fourth Circuit amid district court split, raising Supreme Court review prospects
July 31 surges to 43%29%
Kalshi appealed a Maryland district court decision to the Fourth Circuit on August 5, 2025, amid conflicting district court rulings. This heightened speculation about potential Supreme Court review, causing a sharp but brief price increase in the market.
CFTC grants relief for event contracts, clarifying regulatory status
July 31 surges to 43%29%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission issued a no-action letter granting relief to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange for listing margined event contracts, clarifying that such contracts qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. This regulatory action influenced market perceptions about federal regulatory clarity but did not indicate Supreme Court certiorari, causing a temporary price spike followed by decline.
Kalshi appeals Maryland court ruling, raising Supreme Court review prospects
July 31 surges to 43%29%
On July 30, 2025, Kalshi appealed a Maryland federal court decision rejecting its bid to block state enforcement of unlicensed sports event contracts. This legal split with other district courts increased the likelihood of Supreme Court review, causing a sharp price increase in the market.
Kalshi Appeals to Fourth Circuit Amid District Court Split on Sports Event Contract Regulation
July 31 surges to 43%29%
Kalshi's appeal to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on August 5, 2025, following conflicting district court rulings on whether the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gaming laws, sparked renewed market optimism about Supreme Court review. The legal uncertainty and potential for Supreme Court intervention caused a sharp price increase on July 30, 2025.
SCOTUS Reschedules Sports Case for 2025-26 Term
July 31 drops to 36%14%
The Supreme Court issued a one-page order rescheduling a sports-related case for argument during the 2025-26 term after being unable to resolve it during the 2024-25 term, increasing uncertainty about potential certiorari.
SCOTUSblog warns a third sports‑event‑contract case could reach the Supreme Court
July 31 surges to 43%30%
SCOTUSblog published a story noting that the Supreme Court’s 2025‑26 term had already granted certiorari in two sports‑related cases and that a third case concerning the regulation of “sports event contracts” was expected to be added to the docket. Traders interpreted the report as a strong signal that the Court might soon grant a petition in the Kalshi‑Maryland dispute, pushing the market’s “Yes” price sharply upward on July 30.
Federal judge temporarily blocks Arizona from enforcing gambling laws against prediction market Kalshi
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
A federal judge barred Arizona from prosecuting Kalshi under state gambling laws, citing the Commodity Exchange Act and the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction over swaps, which include event contracts. This ruling increased market confidence that federal regulation preempts state laws, impacting the July 31 outcome probability.
Kalshi files brief emphasizing federal preemption in sports contract litigation
July 31 rises to 14%1%
Kalshi submitted a detailed brief to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling laws as applied to sports event contracts on designated contract markets. This legal argument is central to ongoing litigation and influences market expectations about federal versus state regulatory authority, impacting the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
Trump signs 'Saving College Sports' Executive Order
President Trump signed an Executive Order on July 24, 2025, titled 'Saving College Sports,' which sets policy objectives for college athletics, including scholarship frameworks and roster spot requirements for non-revenue-generating sports starting in 2025-2026.
President Trump issues executive order targeting pay-for-play NIL deals in college sports
President Trump issued an executive order aiming to ban pay-for-play NIL deals and mandate scholarships for women's and Olympic sports, stirring debate but not directly affecting Supreme Court certiorari on sports event contracts. The market remained low following this announcement.
Trump Signs Executive Order Targeting College Sports
President Trump signed the 'Saving College Sports' Executive Order, which includes provisions banning pay-for-play NIL deals and mandating scholarship increases for women's and non-revenue sports, potentially triggering Supreme Court review of NCAA and antitrust issues.
Kalshi's sports event contracts spark ongoing regulatory dispute
Kalshi's offering of sports event contracts without state betting licenses intensified regulatory disputes, with opponents arguing CFTC authority over such contracts threatens state gambling laws. This controversy contributed to market uncertainty and price stagnation at low levels.
First Circuit Affirms Baseball Antitrust Exemption in Puerto Rico League Case
The First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's decision affirming baseball's 1922 antitrust exemption extends to Puerto Rico's top professional baseball league, potentially setting up a Supreme Court review.
Legal Developments Highlight Split in Federal Courts Over Sports Event Contracts
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
Several federal district courts issued conflicting rulings on whether the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gaming laws for sports event contracts, with courts in Nevada and New Jersey favoring federal preemption and Maryland ruling against it. This split raised the prospect of eventual Supreme Court review but did not indicate an imminent certiorari grant, leading to market uncertainty and a price drop from 50% to 13%.
Maryland federal court denies Kalshi's motion for preliminary injunction
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland ruled against Kalshi, rejecting its claim that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling laws, allowing Maryland to enforce its sports wagering laws against Kalshi. This decision contrasted with earlier rulings in Nevada and New Jersey, creating a legal split and impacting market expectations for Supreme Court review.
House passes Digital Asset Market Clarity Act clarifying CFTC and SEC roles
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
On July 17, 2025, the House passed the CLARITY Act, which clarified regulatory jurisdiction between the CFTC and SEC over digital assets, indirectly impacting the regulatory landscape for sports event contracts. This legislative development contributed to market uncertainty about federal regulatory preemption and the likelihood of Supreme Court intervention.
Nevada judge misinterprets Alston decision in NCAA NIL case
A Nevada federal judge incorrectly cited the Supreme Court's NCAA v. Alston (2021) decision, claiming it held the NCAA violated antitrust law by restricting athlete compensation, creating confusion about Supreme Court jurisprudence in sports law.
Misinterpretation of Supreme Court's Alston Decision Affects Sports Law Understanding
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
On July 17, 2025, legal commentary highlighted widespread misunderstanding of the Supreme Court's NCAA v. Alston ruling, which clarified permissible NCAA restrictions. This context influenced perceptions of sports law but did not directly affect the certiorari market.
Nevada District Court Judge Misinterprets Alston Decision in NIL Case
A Nevada federal judge incorrectly cited the Supreme Court's NCAA v. Alston (2021) decision, claiming it authorized NCAA antitrust violations, which could have broader implications for sports law interpretation and Supreme Court review of related issues.
Maryland federal judge denies Kalshi's injunction, supports state regulation
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
Judge Abelson ruled against Kalshi, emphasizing that sports event contracts resemble sports betting and should be subject to state laws. This decision dampened certiorari expectations, causing a sharp price drop from 50% to 13%.
Maryland Judge Rejects Kalshi's Federal Preemption Argument
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
U.S. District Judge Andrew P. Abelson ruled that Maryland can regulate Kalshi's sports event contracts, contradicting prior Nevada and New Jersey rulings and creating a split that could lead to Supreme Court review.
Nevada judge misinterprets Alston decision in NCAA NIL case
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
A Nevada federal judge incorrectly cited the Supreme Court's NCAA v. Alston (2021) decision, claiming it held the NCAA violated antitrust law by restricting athlete compensation, which could have broader implications for sports law interpretation and potential Supreme Court review of related issues.
Nevada District Court Misstates Alston Case, Threatening College Sports Legal Landscape
A Nevada federal district court judge misinterpreted the Supreme Court's Alston decision, claiming it held NCAA violated antitrust law by restricting athlete compensation, creating confusion in college sports governance and legal decisions.
Maryland Judge Denies Kalshi Preliminary Injunction
July 31 plunges to 10%40%
A federal judge ruled that sports event contracts are sports betting and should be subject to state regulation, rejecting Kalshi's claim of federal preemption. This decision could lead to Supreme Court review of the federal vs. state regulatory conflict.
Nevada judge misstates Alston holding in college sports case
A Nevada federal judge incorrectly stated that Alston held the NCAA violated federal antitrust law by restricting athlete compensation, highlighting ongoing misinterpretations of key sports law precedents.
Federal judge in Nevada misinterprets Supreme Court's Alston decision on sports law
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
A Nevada federal district court judge misapplied the Supreme Court's 2021 Alston ruling, affecting perceptions of sports law and potentially influencing legal strategies around sports contracts. This contributed to early market uncertainty.
Federal District Court Judge Misstates Supreme Court's Alston Decision in Sports Compensation Case
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
A Nevada federal district court judge incorrectly interpreted the Supreme Court's Alston ruling regarding NCAA antitrust law, causing confusion about the legal landscape for sports contracts and athlete compensation. This misinterpretation likely contributed to market uncertainty and a sharp drop in the probability of Supreme Court certiorari on sports event contracts.
Nevada Court Misstates Alston Holding in Pay-for-Play Case
A Nevada federal district court judge incorrectly held that in Alston, the Supreme Court ruled the NCAA violated federal antitrust law by restricting student-athlete compensation, creating a legal misstatement that contributed to market confusion.
Nevada judge misinterprets Supreme Court Alston decision in college sports case
A Nevada federal district court judge incorrectly stated that the Supreme Court ruled in NCAA v. Alston (2021) that the NCAA violated federal antitrust law by restricting student-athlete compensation, misrepresenting the actual holding of the case. This misstatement could have created uncertainty about the legal status of NIL and athlete compensation, affecting market sentiment.
Kalshi's Maryland loss signals potential Supreme Court review
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
Judge Abelson's ruling against Kalshi in Maryland rejected the company's argument that federal law preempts state regulation of sports event contracts, setting the stage for possible Supreme Court review of the federal-state regulatory conflict. This decision introduced uncertainty about the case's trajectory, causing initial market price volatility.
Mixed Federal Court Rulings Create Uncertainty Over Sports Event Contract Regulation
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
Federal courts issued conflicting decisions on whether the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling laws for sports event contracts, with Kalshi winning preliminary injunctions in Nevada and New Jersey but losing in Maryland. This legal uncertainty caused market confidence in Supreme Court certiorari to decline sharply.
Kalshi Loss in Maryland Could Pave the Way for Supreme Court Review
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
A Maryland federal court rejected Kalshi’s bid to block state enforcement over unlicensed sports event contracts, creating a split with Nevada and New Jersey rulings and setting the stage for potential Supreme Court certiorari.
Maryland Judge Denies Kalshi's Injunction Request in Sports Contract Case
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson ruled against Kalshi, denying their request for a preliminary injunction to block Maryland's enforcement of sports betting laws against their sports event contracts. This decision challenged Kalshi's argument that federal law preempts state gambling regulations, significantly lowering market confidence in Supreme Court review.
CFTC Begins Staff Firings After Supreme Court Clearance
July 31 plunges to 10%40%
Reuters reported that the CFTC began a wave of staff firings after a recent Supreme Court decision that cleared the path for mass government terminations. The news raised doubts about regulatory stability for CFTC‑designated markets, nudging the market down to its lowest point of 10% the next day.
Federal courts split on whether Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gaming laws for sports event contracts
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
Multiple federal district courts issued conflicting rulings on whether the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) preempts state gambling laws as applied to sports event contracts, notably involving KalshiEX LLC. This legal uncertainty caused a sharp drop in market confidence that the Supreme Court would grant certiorari by July 31, 2025.
Supreme Court clears way for mass federal layoffs, signaling conservative judicial approach
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to proceed with mass federal layoffs, reflecting a conservative majority willing to uphold executive power. While unrelated directly to sports contracts, this ruling influenced perceptions of the Court's docket and priorities during the analysis window, indirectly affecting market sentiment on other cases.
District courts remain split on Commodity Exchange Act preemption in sports contracts
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
US district courts in New Jersey, Nevada, and Maryland issued conflicting rulings on whether the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gaming laws for sports event contracts, creating legal uncertainty and reducing market confidence in Supreme Court certiorari by July 31.
Kalshi's federal court win in Nevada raises hopes for Supreme Court review
Prior to the Maryland ruling, Kalshi had secured favorable decisions in Nevada and New Jersey, supporting federal preemption over state gambling laws for sports event contracts. This bolstered market optimism for Supreme Court certiorari, reflected in the initial 50% price.
CFTC begins staff firings amid regulatory uncertainty
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission started staff firings following Supreme Court clearance for mass government firings, reflecting regulatory turbulence that may indirectly affect oversight of sports event contracts. This event coincided with a sharp market drop, reflecting increased uncertainty about federal regulatory stability.
Kalshi suffers loss in Maryland court, raising prospects for Supreme Court review
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
A Maryland federal court rejected Kalshi's bid to block state enforcement over unlicensed sports event contracts, creating a split with favorable rulings in Nevada and New Jersey. This split increased speculation that the Supreme Court might need to resolve the conflicting interpretations of federal and state regulatory authority over sports event contracts.
Federal courts in Nevada and New Jersey grant preliminary injunctions favoring Kalshi against state gaming regulators
In April 2025, federal courts in Nevada and New Jersey ruled that Kalshi’s sports event contracts fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the CFTC under the Commodity Exchange Act, enjoining state regulators from enforcing state gambling laws against Kalshi. These rulings supported Kalshi’s argument for federal preemption and boosted market confidence in a Supreme Court review.
Judge temporarily bars Arizona from regulating prediction market operators and pauses Kalshi prosecution
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi's ruling found the CFTC had sufficiently shown that event contracts fall within the Commodity Exchange Act's definition of swaps, and that federal law likely preempts Arizona's gambling regulations. This decision directly addresses the legality and federal regulation of sports event contracts.
Market opens at 50% amid anticipation of Supreme Court sports contract case
The market started at 50% probability reflecting general anticipation that the Supreme Court might grant certiorari on a sports event contract case, amid ongoing legal disputes involving Kalshi and state regulators.
Maryland federal court denies Kalshi's motion for preliminary injunction
July 31 plunges to 13%37%
The District of Maryland rejected Kalshi's argument that federal law preempts state gambling laws regarding sports event contracts, creating a split with favorable rulings in Nevada and New Jersey. This increased uncertainty about Supreme Court intervention, causing the market price to drop sharply.
警惕外部链接哦。
警惕外部链接哦。
常见问题