Crypto Prediction Markets Continue To Be Under Siege — Are Traders Now Fair Game For Prosecutors?

bitcoinistPublicado a 2026-04-09Actualizado a 2026-04-09

Resumen

U.S. federal regulators, including the CFTC and DOJ, are seeking a court order to prevent Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against crypto prediction-market platform Kalshi. They argue that contracts tied to sports, elections, and real-world events qualify as financial derivatives ("swaps") under federal law, not state-regulated gambling. This legal action is part of a broader conflict between federal and state authorities over jurisdiction on prediction markets. Arizona and other states contend these platforms constitute illegal gambling and have initiated criminal charges. Similar legal pressures are affecting Kalshi’s rival, Polymarket, which faces lawsuits and investigations in multiple states. The outcome could either legitimize and boost U.S. prediction markets or fragment them into riskier offshore operations.

U.S. regulators are urging a court to stop Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against crypto prediction‐market platform Kalshi.

Another Battle Over Crypto Prediction Markets

In a filing from yesterday, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Justice Department (DOJ) commended a federal court to stop Arizona from using its gambling laws against crypto prediction‐market platform Kalshi.

The agencies are asking for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to halt Arizona’s criminal case and gambling‐law enforcement.

Related Reading: Bitcoin Creator Exposed? New Investigation Points At The Real Identity Of Satoshi Nakamoto

CFTC argues that these contracts tied to sports, elections and other real‐world events qualify as swaps (financial derivatives) under U.S. law, rather than falling under state gambling statutes. The federal regulators based their arguments on the fact that since the contracts are settled on future events with economic impact, they are governed by the Commodity Exchange Act and fall under federal law rather than state authority.

Such interpretation curbs how far individual states can go in blocking or constraining these platforms, which regulators say would otherwise splinter the market into a patchwork of state‐by‐state rules.

The Arizona Lawsuit Explained

Arizona charged Kalshi with illegal gambling over sports and election markets. Arizona, along with an expanding list of other states, argue that contracts tied to sports results operate like ordinary bets and must be treated as gambling, subject to licensing rules, age limits, and consumer safeguards.

According to the court filing, Arizona first sent a cease‐and‐desist order to KalshiEx LLC and Kalshi Trading LLC in May 2025, alleging they were taking unlawful bets in breach of state law. The state then brought criminal charges against both entities for “betting and wagering” under several Arizona statutes, with an arraignment set for April 13.

On Monday, a Third Circuit (one of the 13 U.S. federal courts of appeals) ruling stated that sports event contracts on designated contract markets (DCMs) are “swaps” preempting state gambling laws. However, one judge disagreed, blasting Kalshi’s stance as a “performative sleight” designed to hide the fact that its offerings are, in substance, sports betting.

Crypto Prediction Markets Under A Coordinated State Pushback

This move follows a broader CFTC and DOJ litigation against Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois over prediction‐market jurisdiction. Bitcoinist reported on it last week. This past month, a bipartisan Senate bill targeting sports‐style bets on platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi was introduced by Senators Adam Schiff (D-CA) and John Curtis (R-UT).

Also on March, democratic representative Seth Moulton of Massachusetts (MA-06) formally banned all his staff from participating in prediction markets. That same day, Congressman Adrian Smith (R-NE-03) and Congresswoman Nikki Budzinski (D-IL-13) from Nebraska introduced the PREDICT Act, banning members of Congress from trading on political and policy outcome markets.

Related Reading: SEC Admits Flaws In Crypto Enforment, What Went Wrong?

Kalshi’s main rival, Polymarket, is also under mounting legal fire, with a New York class action filed in February alleging it runs an unlicensed sports‐betting operation. Regulators in Nevada have launched a civil case against its parent company, and authorities in Ohio, Utah, and Iowa have likewise begun probing the platform.

Not too long ago, Argentinian authorities ordered a full national ban of Polymarket after it “predicted” inflation data back in February. On top of that, the platform faced terrible backlash recently after bettors sent death threats to Times of Israel military reporter Emanuel Fabian, following his report of an Iranian ballistic missile on March 10.

Both Kalshi and Polymarket updated their rules at the end of March to preemptively block politicians, candidates and sports insiders from trading on related markets

If the federal preemption is upheld, it will de‐risks U.S. prediction venues, potentially boosting liquidity and making them more attractive as macro and sports‐beta tools for crypto‐savvy traders. However, if states carve out sports and politics as gambling, markets may fragment offshore or into on‐chain, harder‐to‐police venues, raising operational and legal risk premia for anyone treating these contracts as serious hedging instruments.

Yesterday, Bitcoin bounced back and reclaimed $72k. At the moment of writing, BTC trades for around $71k on the daily chart. Source: BTCUSD on Tradingview.

Cover image from Perplexity. BTCUSD chart from Tradingview.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main argument of the U.S. regulators (CFTC and DOJ) against Arizona's enforcement of its gambling laws on Kalshi?

AThe CFTC and DOJ argue that the contracts offered by Kalshi, which are tied to sports, elections, and other real-world events, qualify as financial derivatives (swaps) under U.S. federal law, specifically the Commodity Exchange Act. They contend that these contracts, because they are settled on future events with economic impact, fall under federal jurisdiction and preempt state gambling statutes.

QWhat specific legal measures are the federal agencies requesting from the court regarding Arizona's case against Kalshi?

AThe Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Justice Department (DOJ) are asking the court for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction to halt Arizona's criminal case and its enforcement of gambling laws against Kalshi.

QAccording to the article, what was the recent ruling by the Third Circuit court regarding sports event contracts on designated contract markets (DCMs)?

AA recent Third Circuit ruling stated that sports event contracts on designated contract markets (DCMs) are considered 'swaps,' which preempts state gambling laws. However, one judge dissented, calling Kalshi's stance a 'performative sleight' designed to disguise what is essentially sports betting.

QBesides Kalshi, which other major prediction market platform is facing significant legal challenges, and what are some examples?

AKalshi's main rival, Polymarket, is also under significant legal pressure. A New York class action lawsuit was filed in February alleging it runs an unlicensed sports-betting operation. Regulators in Nevada have launched a civil case against its parent company, and authorities in Ohio, Utah, and Iowa are probing the platform. It was also completely banned in Argentina.

QWhat are the two potential future scenarios for U.S. prediction markets outlined at the end of the article, depending on the legal outcome?

AIf federal preemption is upheld, it would de-risk U.S. prediction venues, potentially boosting their liquidity and attractiveness as trading tools. Conversely, if states successfully classify these markets as gambling, the markets may fragment and move offshore or into on-chain venues that are harder to police, thereby raising operational and legal risks for traders.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Saeed Al-Marri: How Tokenization Unlocks New Opportunities for Shipping Funds

Said Al-Marri: How Tokenization Opens New Opportunities for Shipping Funds For centuries, commercial shipping has been a capital-intensive asset class limited to institutional funds and shipping dynasties. Said bin Saleh Al-Marri, CEO of Ethra Invest and Ethra Ship, aims to break down these barriers by combining Real World Asset (RWA) tokenization with conservative private equity principles. This bridges decentralized finance (DeFi) with the physical realities of global trade. Tokenization allows fractional ownership of ships on a blockchain, giving smaller investors access to previously inaccessible markets. However, Al-Marri warns it is not a regulatory loophole or a cure for asset illiquidity. The core physical risks are isolated in Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) for qualified investors. While tokenization enhances transparency and ownership record-keeping, Al-Marri stresses that a liquid secondary market depends on transparent asset valuation and must not interfere with ship operations managed by professionals. Regarding legal enforcement, smart contracts cannot physically seize a ship. Legal recourse still relies on traditional maritime courts, ship mortgages, and flag state laws, with blockchain records needing to mirror legal ownership in the SPV perfectly. Beyond ownership, the industry faces administrative hurdles like paper-based bills of lading. Al-Marri argues the bottleneck is legal and operational standardization, not technology. He advocates for a hybrid model combining digital trade documents and programmable settlements with support from regulated financial institutions, rather than a full crypto replacement for tools like Letters of Credit. A major challenge is decarbonizing the global fleet by 2050. Transitioning to green fuels requires massive upfront investment. Al-Marri emphasizes a conservative, holistic approach to underwriting these projects, evaluating technology, fuel availability, safety, and resale value. Investments must be justified under conservative forecasts, not just optimistic ones. By combining pragmatic risk management with digital infrastructure, leaders like Al-Marri show that the evolution of maritime finance is about mobilizing capital to build a modernized and sustainable global fleet, not just putting ships on a blockchain.

cryptonews.ruHace 16 min(s)

Saeed Al-Marri: How Tokenization Unlocks New Opportunities for Shipping Funds

cryptonews.ruHace 16 min(s)

Six Years Later, UNI Finally Welcomes Its Own "Buyback Bull"

After years of debate, Uniswap's UNI token has finally entered a 'buyback bull' phase following the long-awaited activation of its fee-switch mechanism. The UNIfication proposal, executed in December 2025, redirected a portion of protocol fees from select pools and Unichain sequencer revenue into a treasury (TokenJar) dedicated to buying back and permanently burning UNI. Initial market reaction was muted due to modest early burn rates. A significant shift occurred in July 2026 with the launch of Robinhood Chain. Uniswap's immediate deployment there skyrocketed trading volume, making it a top fee-generator. Subsequently, governance votes extended the fee mechanism to v4 pools and Robinhood Chain, causing protocol revenue to nearly triple. Daily funds directed to UNI burns rose sharply, with Robinhood Chain contributing over half. This transitioned UNI's narrative from a governance token to a cash-flow asset backed by a perpetual automatic buyer. UNI's price, which had languished around $2.30 in early June, nearly doubled to approach $4.60 by late July. Analysts credit this to the tangible cash flow from fees rather than mere speculation. Unlike many newer projects where buybacks are offset by large investor unlocks, UNI's six-year history has resulted in a widely distributed and relatively clean supply, allowing the buyback pressure to effectively impact the secondary market. The key test will be whether trading activity, particularly on Robinhood Chain, sustains after its initial gas subsidies expire.

marsbitHace 21 min(s)

Six Years Later, UNI Finally Welcomes Its Own "Buyback Bull"

marsbitHace 21 min(s)

Only 153 Venture Capital Firms Invested in July: Is the Crypto VC Industry Experiencing a 'Mass Extinction'?

In July 2026, only 153 unique venture capital firms participated in disclosed crypto funding rounds, marking the lowest monthly count since November 2020. This figure represents an 87% decline from the peak of 1,177 firms in 2022. Overall, the first seven months of 2026 saw crypto projects raise approximately $11.78 billion across 481 rounds. This crypto VC contraction contrasts sharply with the broader venture capital landscape, where global VC investment reached a record $560.4 billion in H1 2026, heavily fueled by major AI company financings. This shift in capital allocation has drawn funds away from the crypto sector. Within crypto, funding is highly concentrated. Trading platforms, prediction markets, and payment sectors absorbed 53% of the total capital. While early-stage deals remain frequent, the largest sums flow to a few late-stage rounds and mergers & acquisitions, which surged to $7.23 billion in Q2 2026. The market is consolidating around top funds like a16z crypto and Dragonfly, which successfully raised new multi-billion dollar funds, while many smaller firms have retreated. Analysts describe this as a "great extinction" for crypto VCs, where capital is becoming more selective, favoring proven business models and assets over early-stage speculation. This raises the bar for project quality, funding efficiency, and viable exit paths.

marsbitHace 42 min(s)

Only 153 Venture Capital Firms Invested in July: Is the Crypto VC Industry Experiencing a 'Mass Extinction'?

marsbitHace 42 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片