US lawmakers from gaming states urge SCOTUS to take up Kalshi case

A group of state lawmakers representing gaming jurisdictions asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take up New Jersey’s appeal in its dispute with prediction-market operator Kalshi. The National Council of Legislators from Gaming States (NCLGS) submitted an amicus curiae brief backing New Jersey’s petition for a writ of certiorari, which seeks review of a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

In its filing, the NCLGS warned that a ruling favoring Kalshi would effectively leave states without the power to oversee sports-betting-style contracts traded on prediction platforms, creating “substantial harm and confusion” for state regulatory schemes. The brief urged the Court to preserve state authority over gaming-related matters, arguing that otherwise regulated entities such as casinos and pari-mutuel operators might alter their offerings to obtain the same regulatory status asserted by Kalshi.

New Jersey’s petition asks the Supreme Court to resolve whether state regulators or federal agencies have primary jurisdiction over event contracts traded on prediction markets. The appeal followed the Third Circuit’s related decision; New Jersey filed for certiorari on Sept. 2. Kalshi has not yet officially filed a response in the Supreme Court; the company has until Nov. 9 to submit its brief, according to court timelines referenced in coverage.

Kalshi previously told media that it could not be “regulated by 50 different regulators,” a position that reflects the company’s argument against patchwork state oversight. The NCLGS brief did not directly address the counterargument that event contracts on federally regulated markets may fall under exclusive Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) jurisdiction. If the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, its ruling could clarify the boundary between state gaming law and federal oversight of prediction markets.