Lawmakers Urge Supreme Court to Hear Kalshi Case
NCLGS filed a brief supporting New Jersey's bid to resolve state vs. federal betting rules.
Key points
- NCLGS filed an amicus brief supporting New Jersey's Supreme Court petition.
- The case determines if states or federal agencies regulate prediction markets.
- Kalshi must file a response brief by Nov. 9 to state its position.
A group of US state lawmakers filed a brief with the Supreme Court on Tuesday. They support New Jersey's petition against prediction market platform Kalshi. The case seeks clarity on who regulates sports bets.
The National Council of Legislators from Gaming States backed the state's position. They argue that state authorities must keep control over local gaming markets. The filing was submitted to the highest court in the nation.
Jurisdiction dispute centers on betting
The petition asks the court to decide who has authority. It is unclear if states or federal agencies control these platforms. This legal gap creates confusion for regulators and operators alike.
The NCLGS warned that ruling for Kalshi would weaken state power. They claim this would cause substantial harm and confusion in the market. They believe gaming matters should remain under individual state control.
Lawmakers fear industry-wide regulatory shifts
The brief argues that other regulated entities would seek similar status. Casinos and pari-mutuel operators might change their business models to match Kalshi. This could force states to reconsider their entire regulatory regimes.
The filing did not address the competing federal argument. It ignored the view that event contracts fall under CFTC jurisdiction. This omission leaves a significant legal question unanswered for the court.
Company deadline approaches for response
Kalshi has until Nov. 9 to file its response brief. A spokesperson told Cointelegraph that the company cannot be regulated by 50 different regulators. The company has not yet provided an official response to the petition.
