- State lawmakers asked the US Supreme Court to review New Jersey’s dispute with Kalshi.
- The filing says a ruling for Kalshi could weaken state control over sports betting regulation.
- Kalshi has until Nov. 9 to file a brief stating its position in the case.
A group of US state lawmakers is pushing the Supreme Court to weigh the Kalshi case, a dispute that could affect how prediction markets tied to sports betting are regulated. On Tuesday, the National Council of Legislators from Gaming States filed an amicus brief supporting New Jersey’s Attorney General and gaming authorities. The filing backs a petition for a writ of certiorari that was submitted on Sept. 2. If the court takes the Kalshi case, it could help settle whether state authorities or federal agencies have jurisdiction over prediction market companies operating in this area.
Lawmakers back New Jersey in the Kalshi case
The National Council of Legislators from Gaming States, or NCLGS, filed its brief in support of New Jersey’s position before the US Supreme Court. The group urged the justices to consider the dispute between Kalshi and state gaming authorities. Their filing supports a petition from New Jersey’s Attorney General and gaming regulators asking the court to review the matter.
That petition was filed on Sept. 2 as part of an appeal after a decision from the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. At the center of the dispute is whether oversight of prediction market companies belongs to state officials or to federal agencies. If the Supreme Court accepts the case, the outcome could provide guidance for both state and federal authorities on sports bets tied to prediction markets.
State concerns over sports betting oversight
In its amicus curiae filing, the NCLGS argued that a decision favoring Kalshi would leave states unable to regulate sports betting on prediction markets. The group said such an outcome would create substantial harm and confusion. It also argued that gaming-related matters should remain under the authority of individual US states.
The filing said that if Kalshi’s activities described as sports betting were found to be outside state regulation, other regulated businesses could try to follow the same path. State lawmakers specifically pointed to casinos, pari-mutuel operators, and other heavily regulated entities. According to the filing, existing state regulatory systems around this activity could need to be reconsidered if preemption is found in this area.
Federal jurisdiction arguments in the Kalshi case
The lawmakers’ filing supported New Jersey’s side, but it did not address the competing position that event contracts traded on federally regulated markets fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the CFTC. That unresolved point remains central to the broader disagreement over who should supervise these products.
Kalshi has not yet submitted an official response to the Supreme Court petition. The company has until Nov. 9 to file a brief stating its position in the case. After the initial filing, a spokesperson told Cointelegraph that Kalshi could not be regulated by 50 different regulators.
Conclusion
The Kalshi case now sits before the US Supreme Court as state lawmakers from gaming states line up behind New Jersey’s appeal. Their filing argues that state authority over sports betting on prediction markets could be weakened if Kalshi prevails, while the broader dispute still turns on whether state regulators or federal agencies should have control. With the petition already filed and no official response yet from Kalshi, attention will now shift to the company’s next step. Kalshi has until Nov. 9 to submit a brief, making that deadline the next key point in a case that could shape regulatory clarity.
Disclaimer
The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice. The article does not offer sufficient information to make investment decisions, nor does it constitute an offer, recommendation, or solicitation to buy or sell any financial instrument. The content is opinion of the author and does not reflect any view or suggestion or any kind of advise from CryptoNewsBytes.com. The author declares he does not hold any of the above mentioned tokens or received any incentive from any company.
Featured image created by AI
