The US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin has certified an interlocutory appeal in Ho-Chunk Nation’s case against Kalshi, moving two questions concerning tribal gaming authority and sports-related event contracts towards the Seventh Circuit.
Ho-Chunk Nation sued Kalshi and Robinhood over event contracts accessible on its tribal lands, alleging the products constitute unauthorized class III gaming under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA).
District Judge William Conley previously allowed the Nation’s IGRA claim to proceed and found it had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits. However, preliminary injunctive relief was denied because the Nation had not demonstrated irreparable harm.
The latest order certifies questions concerning whether IGRA allows the Nation to seek an injunction against unauthorized class III gaming offered on tribal land by an entity outside its tribal-state compact.
The appeals court will also be asked whether the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) or Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act preempts that authority.
The dispute comes as federal courts reach differing conclusions over the extent to which CFTC regulation prevents state and tribal gaming enforcement.
In August, the Ninth Circuit found Kalshi had not demonstrated that the CEA preempts Nevada gaming regulations covering its sports event contracts. It also concluded the contracts were not swaps under the relevant CEA definition.
That decision followed a different approach from the Third Circuit, which upheld preliminary injunctive relief for Kalshi in its New Jersey litigation. The Ninth Circuit acknowledged that ruling while rejecting Kalshi’s preemption position in the Nevada case.
Tribal challenges have produced conflicting outcomes as well. In November 2025, a Northern District of California judge denied preliminary relief sought by Blue Lake Rancheria and two other tribes, finding they had not demonstrated a likelihood of success on their IGRA claim against Kalshi.
Conley said the Wisconsin dispute raises novel legal questions without controlling Seventh Circuit precedent and concluded appellate consideration could avoid litigating the same issues through summary judgment before a later appeal.
The court separately denied Ho-Chunk Nation’s attempt to revive its Lanham Act false advertising claim concerning Kalshi’s representations about legal sports betting. It found the continuing disagreement among courts meant there was no clear legal determination establishing those representations as false.
The certification follows another legal setback for Kalshi after the 10th Circuit US Court of Appeals denied its request for an emergency injunction against Utah, allowing state regulators to enforce anti-gambling laws while the underlying dispute continues.
The Ninth Circuit said more than 90% of Kalshi’s trades during 2025 were sports-related and accounted for 95% of its revenue
