The CFTC says CME can't sue over U.S. perps because it hasn't been hurt, pointing to a 23% rise in CME's own crypto futures volume since May.
The CFTC asked a federal judge on Friday to toss CME Group's lawsuit over U.S. perpetual futures, arguing in a reply brief that CME lacks standing, meaning it hasn't shown the policy actually harms it.
What's the Scoop?
Why CME Sued: CME sued in June to undo the CFTC's May 29 approval of Kalshi's bitcoin perp as a future, arguing perps are really swaps, a label that would push them into a heavier, institution-focused rulebook and away from the retail traders CME now competes for. As we wrote at the time, "The exchange is asking for a reclassification, not a ban."
No Harm Shown: The CFTC points to CME's own numbers: monthly crypto futures volume rose from about 2.66M contracts in May to 3.28M in September, and CME has told investors its customers aren't asking for perps.
What's Next: Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly will decide whether the case survives, after she rejected the CFTC's earlier bid to dig into CME's business. Meanwhile, the market keeps growing: Kalshi launched what it calls "the first stock index perpetual future in America" on Oct. 6.
Why CME Is Really Suing the CFTC Over Perps on Bankless
CME wants Kalshi's Bitcoin perp reclassified as a swap, not banned. That distinction reveals what's actually at stake in the CFTC lawsuit.
Bankless
David Christopher
740 posts
David is a writer/analyst at Bankless. Prior to joining Bankless, he worked for a series of early-stage crypto startups and on grants from the Ethereum, Solana, and Urbit Foundations. He graduated from Skidmore College in New York. He currently lives in the Midwest and enjoys NFTs, but no longer participates in them.