The U.S. National Football League (NFL) has formally weighed in with the Supreme Court, arguing that sports contracts on prediction markets are gambling and should be regulated by the states. According to the Supreme Court case record, on October 8, the NFL filed an amicus brief supporting the appeal by New Jersey’s Division of Gaming Enforcement against prediction market platform Kalshi, and asked the Supreme Court to take up the case.
This case, numbered 26-299, is one in which New Jersey filed a petition on September 2 with the Supreme Court seeking a writ of certiorari to challenge an April ruling by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which had been reported previously. The Third Circuit held that Kalshi’s sports-related event contracts are swap contracts exclusively subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and therefore state gambling regulations are excluded from applying.
NFL: On the opening first Sunday of the season, more than half of trading volume in the prediction market is placed on the NFL
In its brief, the NFL said that on the league’s first Sunday of the season, out of $3.3 billion in total trading volume in the prediction market, $1.8 billion was related to NFL games, accounting for more than half. The brief was signed by lawyers including William Barr, the U.S. attorney general during President Trump’s first term. Only the NFL filed it; no other professional sports league joined.
The NFL argues that state governments and legal sports wagering operators have already put in place safeguards to protect the fairness of games—such as restrictions on certain types of bets and age limits—while prediction markets are not subject to these rules. The brief gives an example: in nearly every state, 18-year-olds cannot place a bet on a game via Caesars Sportsbook, but they can bet on the same game on Kalshi. The NFL also noted that the CFTC has only 543 employees nationwide, while Nevada’s and Pennsylvania’s gaming regulators have roughly 400 people each.
In its brief, the NFL wrote that, to date, Kalshi has not worked with the NFL to address compliance issues. The NFL also told CNBC that neither the CFTC nor prediction market operators have banned bet types that are easy to manipulate, nor have they set an age threshold of 21. Given the CFTC’s staffing constraints, the NFL said this work is better handled by the states.
Circuit court rulings differ; Kalshi’s response deadline is November 9
The NFL is asking the Supreme Court to take up the case now, to clarify the dispute before the next NFL season kicks off. The brief states that in September, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and, in August, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit both found that Kalshi’s sports-event contracts do not meet the statutory definition of exchange contracts, which conflicts with the view of the Third Circuit.
Court records show that this appeal has received multiple amicus briefs, including submissions filed jointly on October 7 by 39 states such as Ohio and Washington, D.C.—along with national organizations representing betting-state lawmakers, including the NCLGS, the International Association of Gaming Regulators, and the North American Gaming Regulators Association. Kalshi’s response deadline was extended to November 9, and the Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to hear the case.
According to CNBC, the NHL has partnered with Kalshi and Polymarket; MLB, the National Football League in the U.S., and UFC have signed deals with Polymarket. The NFL, NBA, and PGA currently have not entered into partnerships with prediction markets.
In the article, the NFL tells the Supreme Court: sports contracts in prediction markets are gambling and should be regulated by the states. First appeared on.