The News
Prediction market Kalshi is in no rush for the Supreme Court to wade into its battle with states.
The company agrees with skeptics like the NFL that justices must eventually opine on whether states and tribes should regulate its sports event contracts as sports bets, a Supreme Court litigator working with Kalshi told Semafor. But it also believes that pending rehearing petitions and forthcoming Commodity Futures Trading Commission rules are currently muddying the waters, the litigator said.
Kalshi, represented by the attorney who convinced justices to strike down Trump’s tariffs, recently requested a month-long extension from the court. That extension, coupled with Kalshi’s rehearing petitions, has led the gaming industry to believe the company lacks confidence in its case.
“It’s fitting that as Halloween approaches, Kalshi seems spooked by the idea of the Supreme Court taking up the case next year,” American Gaming Association spokesperson Rob Lockwood told Semafor. “Because they don’t want to risk losing sports gambling — which is roughly 85% of their total volume!”
The litigator disputed that characterization, calling the extension request a common move that was necessary for Kalshi to respond to the amicus briefs due the same day. Nevada, they noted, recently requested a similar extension in a related case.
Know More
The Supreme Court has until January to decide which cases it wants to hear in its current term, which began earlier this month. A clash between federal appeals courts has made the prediction markets litigation a likely pick: The Third Circuit has sided with Kalshi, while the Sixth and Ninth Circuits have sided with the states.
Kalshi has filed rehearing petitions asking the Sixth and Ninth Circuits to review their latest rulings, citing the forthcoming CFTC rules. Nevada has already pushed back on the Ninth Circuit request, arguing that the pending regulation “would not change the outcome here.”
CFTC Chair Mike Selig, who’s defended prediction markets in courts across the country, told Semafor earlier this year that he would “welcome” a Supreme Court ruling. That “would really settle the matter,” he said.