US District Judge Analisa Torres denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction to block New York from applying its gambling laws to the platform’s sports-event contracts. Torres ruled that the federal Commodity Exchange Act did not displace those state laws in this case.
The ruling leaves New York able to enforce its gambling laws against Kalshi’s sports-event contracts while the dispute proceeds.
The day’s most important stories, free. One email a day.
A federal judge in Michigan denied Polymarket and Robinhood’s requests for preliminary injunctions against state gambling enforcement on 18 June. Judge Paul L. Maloney questioned whether federal derivatives law displaced states’ authority over sports-event contracts, but said the injunction decision was not a final ruling on their legality.
The Second Circuit denied Kalshi’s requests to block enforcement action in New York and Connecticut, and Coinbase’s similar request in Connecticut, on 3 November. The panel said the companies had not shown that interim injunctions were warranted; the underlying cases continue.
At the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Kalshi lost its bid for temporary relief against authorities in New York and Connecticut, and Coinbase was refused a preliminary injunction in Connecticut. On Tuesday, Nov. 3, a three-judge panel held that the prediction market companies cannot stop state regulators from pursuing enforcement action while their cases continue.
It was reported that a federal judge denied Kalshi’s bid for a preliminary injunction, finding federal commodities law did not override New York gambling law. Kalshi appealed to the Second Circuit the same day.
The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld the removal of Kalshi’s preliminary injunction against Nevada authorities over sports-related contracts. The court treated the contracts as sports bets rather than swaps under federal law, allowing Nevada to apply its gambling rules; Kalshi said it would seek further review.
It was reported that the CFTC failed to secure a preliminary injunction against Wisconsin’s prediction market enforcement. The agency had sued the governor, attorney general and state gaming regulator.