Appeals Court Says Ohio and Tennessee Can Regulate Kalshi Sports Contracts
publishers 15articles 16first reported 24 Sep, 11:30 UTCdeveloping since 24 Sep · 6 editions
A federal appeals court ruled Friday that Ohio and Tennessee may apply their gambling laws to sports-related event contracts offered by prediction-market platform Kalshi, delivering another legal defeat to the industry.
The unanimous three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Kalshi had not shown that its sports-event contracts qualify as “swaps” subject to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s exclusive jurisdiction. The court added that even if the contracts were swaps, the Commodity Exchange Act would not expressly or implicitly preempt the states’ gambling laws.
The ruling overturned a Tennessee federal district court decision favoring Kalshi and upheld the position taken by a federal district court in Ohio. Kalshi and other prediction-market operators contend that event contracts are federally regulated financial derivatives. States have argued that sports-related contracts constitute gambling and must comply with state sports-betting laws.
Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said Kalshi had sought to avoid the state’s sports-gambling rules and taxes. Kalshi spokesperson Dani Lever said the company disagreed with the ruling and argued that differing court decisions demonstrate why state-by-state regulation is unworkable.
According to CNBC, the decision is the second appeals-court ruling in less than a month finding that states have a role in regulating sports-event contracts, as broader litigation over federal and state authority continues.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 8 articles, 1 with the publisher's own text; 8 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written within the hour the record first saw the story; the editor kept it as written.
- Publishers
- 15
- Source articles
- 16
- Given to the writer
- 8, 1 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 8
- This version written
- within the hour the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- kept as written
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →