NFL takes position with the Supreme Court: sports contracts on prediction markets are gambling and should be regulated by the states
The National Football League (NFL) has formally weighed in with the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that sports contracts traded on prediction markets constitute gambling and should be regulated by the states. According to case records from the U.S. Supreme Court, on Oct. 8 the NFL filed a brief as amicus curiae in support of the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement’s appeal involving prediction market platform Kalshi, asking the Supreme Court to hear the case.
This case is docketed as No. 26-299. On Sept. 2, New Jersey petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, challenging an April ruling by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, previously reported. The Third Circuit held that Kalshi’s sports-related event contracts are swap agreements falling exclusively under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and therefore state gaming laws were inapplicable.
NFL: On the first Sunday of the season, more than half of prediction market trading volume is bet on the NFL
In its brief, the NFL said that on the first Sunday of this season, of the $3.3 billion total trading volume on prediction markets, $1.8 billion was related to NFL games—accounting for more than half. The brief was signed by attorneys including William Barr, the attorney general from Donald Trump’s first term. The NFL filed it alone, with no other professional leagues joining.
The NFL argues that state governments and licensed sports-betting operators already have mechanisms in place to protect the fairness of competitions—such as bans on certain types of bets and age limits—whereas prediction markets are not subject to those rules. The brief gives an example: in nearly every state, an 18-year-old cannot place a wager on a game through Caesars Sportsbook, but can place a bet on the same game on Kalshi.
The NFL also notes that nationwide the CFTC has only 543 employees, while the Nevada and Pennsylvania gaming regulators each have nearly 400 staff members.
In the brief, the NFL wrote that Kalshi has not, to date, worked with the NFL to address compliance issues. The NFL also told CNBC that the CFTC and prediction market operators have not prohibited bet types that are easy to manipulate and have not set an age threshold of 21. Given the CFTC’s staffing limits, the NFL says this work is better handled by the states.
Circuit court views have differed; Kalshi’s response deadline is Nov. 9
The NFL asked the Supreme Court to take up the case now to clarify the dispute before the next NFL season begins. The brief points out that the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in September and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in August both held that Kalshi’s sports event contracts do not meet the statutory definition of swap agreements—contrary to the Third Circuit’s view.
The case record shows that multiple amicus briefs have been filed in support of the appeal, including submissions by NCLGS, a national organization representing gaming lawmakers; the International Association of Gaming Regulators and the North American Gaming Regulators Association; and amicus briefs filed jointly by 39 states including Ohio together with Washington, D.C. Kalshi’s response deadline has been extended to Nov. 9, and the Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to take the case.
CNBC reported that the NHL has partnered with Kalshi and Polymarket, while MLB, Major League Soccer in the United States, and UFC have signed deals with Polymarket. The NFL, NBA, and PGA currently have not entered partnerships with prediction markets.
This article: NFL submits position to the Supreme Court—sports contracts on prediction markets are gambling and should be regulated by the states
First appeared on.
The National Football League (NFL) has formally weighed in with the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that sports contracts traded on prediction markets constitute gambling and should be regulated by the states. According to case records from the U.S. Supreme Court, on Oct. 8 the NFL filed a brief as amicus curiae in support of the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement’s appeal involving prediction market platform Kalshi, asking the Supreme Court to hear the case.
This case is docketed as No. 26-299. On Sept. 2, New Jersey petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, challenging an April ruling by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, previously reported. The Third Circuit held that Kalshi’s sports-related event contracts are swap agreements falling exclusively under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and therefore state gaming laws were inapplicable.
NFL: On the first Sunday of the season, more than half of prediction market trading volume is bet on the NFL
In its brief, the NFL said that on the first Sunday of this season, of the $3.3 billion total trading volume on prediction markets, $1.8 billion was related to NFL games—accounting for more than half. The brief was signed by attorneys including William Barr, the attorney general from Donald Trump’s first term. The NFL filed it alone, with no other professional leagues joining.
The NFL argues that state governments and licensed sports-betting operators already have mechanisms in place to protect the fairness of competitions—such as bans on certain types of bets and age limits—whereas prediction markets are not subject to those rules. The brief gives an example: in nearly every state, an 18-year-old cannot place a wager on a game through Caesars Sportsbook, but can place a bet on the same game on Kalshi.
The NFL also notes that nationwide the CFTC has only 543 employees, while the Nevada and Pennsylvania gaming regulators each have nearly 400 staff members.
In the brief, the NFL wrote that Kalshi has not, to date, worked with the NFL to address compliance issues. The NFL also told CNBC that the CFTC and prediction market operators have not prohibited bet types that are easy to manipulate and have not set an age threshold of 21. Given the CFTC’s staffing limits, the NFL says this work is better handled by the states.
Circuit court views have differed; Kalshi’s response deadline is Nov. 9
The NFL asked the Supreme Court to take up the case now to clarify the dispute before the next NFL season begins. The brief points out that the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in September and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in August both held that Kalshi’s sports event contracts do not meet the statutory definition of swap agreements—contrary to the Third Circuit’s view.
The case record shows that multiple amicus briefs have been filed in support of the appeal, including submissions by NCLGS, a national organization representing gaming lawmakers; the International Association of Gaming Regulators and the North American Gaming Regulators Association; and amicus briefs filed jointly by 39 states including Ohio together with Washington, D.C. Kalshi’s response deadline has been extended to Nov. 9, and the Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to take the case.
CNBC reported that the NHL has partnered with Kalshi and Polymarket, while MLB, Major League Soccer in the United States, and UFC have signed deals with Polymarket. The NFL, NBA, and PGA currently have not entered partnerships with prediction markets.
This article: NFL submits position to the Supreme Court—sports contracts on prediction markets are gambling and should be regulated by the states
First appeared on.