The National Council of Legislators from Gaming States (NCLGS) is asking the US Supreme Court to review the New Jersey v. Kalshi dispute.
NCLGS has submitted an amicus brief, contending that the Third Circuit’s ruling might undermine states’ control over sports betting and other gaming activities. The brief backs the New Jersey Attorney General and state gaming regulators in their petition for Supreme Court consideration of their dispute with the prediction market platform.
The dispute revolves around whether prediction market regulation falls under state or federal jurisdiction.
In its submission, NCLGS asserted that siding with Kalshi would strip states of their power. The organization insists that "gaming-related matters" ought to remain under the authority of individual states.
NCLGS is also concerned that if Kalshi can operate sports-betting products outside state gambling regulation, traditional casinos, sportsbooks and other regulated gaming businesses could restructure their products to claim the same federal status.
In related news, the Tunica-Biloxi Tribe has announced plans to introduce the first Tribal prediction market through a partnership with Kalshi.
Indian Gaming Association (IGA) Chairman David Bean has been highly critical of the deal, stating: “There is nothing in the CFTC’s work around for Tribes that benefits Tribal economies, it will only benefit prediction markets and allow unregulated sports betting to flourish.
“Kalshi… will use your customer lists and Tribal sovereignty to simply add more money to their CEOs' pocketbooks. This fight is far from finished, but together, Tribal Nations will see this battle to its successful end.”
Global Gaming Insider explored whether this marks a new era for Tribes or is an isolated move likely to draw criticism from the broader industry.
Earlier this week, the CFTC warned that “mention markets” – contracts tied to whether someone says certain words, attends an event or interacts with another person – carry a heightened risk of manipulation
