U.S. Court Clears Path for Nevada to Take Action Against Kalshi Prediction Market

TheNewsCryptoPublished on 2026-03-20Last updated on 2026-03-20

Abstract

A U.S. appeals court has allowed Nevada to proceed with legal action against prediction market platform Kalshi, denying the company’s request to block a potential temporary restraining order. This could force Kalshi to suspend operations in Nevada for about two weeks until a follow-up hearing. The dispute began in March 2025 when the Nevada Gaming Control Board issued a cease-and-desist order, arguing that Kalshi’s sports-related prediction contracts violate state gambling laws. Kalshi contends that its products are federally regulated by the CFTC, which supports its position. The ruling is a setback for Kalshi and may lead to an imminent temporary ban in the state.

A U.S. appeals court has permitted the state of Nevada to pursue legal action against predictionmarket platform Kalshi. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Kalshi’s request to block a possible temporary restraining order (TRO). If approved, Kalshi may have to stop operating in the state for a short time, likely around two weeks, until the next hearing.

What this Case carries

The problem began in March 2025 when Kalshi received a cease-and-desist order from the Nevada Gaming Control Board. Because it believes that sports-related prediction contracts violate state gambling laws, the regulator asked Kalshi to cease providing them. Kalshi countered that federalregulations, not state regulations, govern its products.

With the court decision, Nevada may now issue a temporary restraining order. Legal experts say that this order could come very soon, and Kalshi could be forced to stop operating in Nevada, and the ban could last at least two weeks.

Kalshi warned that it would face serious harm if the court did not intervene. The firm says that it could face multiple legal cases at the same time, and different courts might give conflicting decisions. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) supports Kalshi’s view. The CFTC says it has authority over prediction markets, while states like Nevada believe they also have control, especially for sports-related products.

The court’s decision represents a setback for Kalshi and provides an opportunity for Nevada to take more robust action. The next few days will be important, as a temporary ban on Kalshi in Nevada could be enforced soon. More updates are expected soon as the state court moves forward with the case.

Highlighted Crypto News:

FBI Issues Warning Over Fake ‘FBI Tokens’ on Tron Network

TagsCryptocurrencyKalshi

Related Questions

QWhat action did the U.S. appeals court allow Nevada to take against Kalshi?

AThe U.S. appeals court permitted Nevada to pursue legal action and denied Kalshi's request to block a possible temporary restraining order (TRO).

QWhy did the Nevada Gaming Control Board issue a cease-and-desist order to Kalshi in March 2025?

AThe Nevada Gaming Control Board issued the order because it believes Kalshi's sports-related prediction contracts violate state gambling laws.

QWhat is Kalshi's argument regarding the regulation of its prediction market products?

AKalshi argues that federal regulations, not state regulations, govern its products.

QWhich federal regulatory body supports Kalshi's position in this case?

AThe Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) supports Kalshi's view, stating it has authority over prediction markets.

QWhat potential immediate consequence could Kalshi face in Nevada following the court's decision?

AKalshi could face a temporary ban on operating in Nevada for at least two weeks if a temporary restraining order is issued.

Related Reads

Apple Also Has to Pay Rent Now

Apple Pays Rent Too: The Two-Way Flow of "Traffic Tax" and "AI Capability Rent" Between Tech Giants For over two decades, Google has paid Apple an estimated $20 billion annually to remain the default search engine on Safari, a "traffic tax" for a critical user entry point. However, in 2026, the direction of this cash flow partially reversed. Apple agreed to pay Google roughly $1 billion per year to license its Gemini AI models, as Apple's own models reportedly struggled with complex tasks. This creates a unique dynamic: Apple acts as the "landlord" in the established search ecosystem, collecting rent from Google for access. Simultaneously, in the emerging AI arena, Apple becomes the "tenant," paying Google for access to cutting-edge AI capabilities it cannot currently match internally. While Apple claims its new models are "distilled" from Gemini outputs and contain "not a drop" of Google's original code, core dependencies remain. Its knowledge base is refined using Gemini's outputs, and its most powerful cloud model runs on Google's infrastructure. Apple has structured the deal as non-exclusive, allowing it to theoretically switch AI suppliers—a hedge against over-reliance. The future hinges on whether advanced AI models become a commodity (cheap and abundant) or remain a concentrated, scarce resource (expensive and controlled by few). Apple is betting on the former, leveraging its massive device ecosystem to be a powerful, choosy customer. If the latter proves true, its bargaining power could erode. This power dynamic is extending to developers. Apple, Google, and WeChat are all pushing for apps to expose their core functions as standardized "actions" or "intents" that their respective AI assistants (Siri, Gemini, WeChat AI) can directly call. The new scarce resource is no longer just app store visibility, but "being selected by the AI." The currency of "rent" has changed from a 30% revenue share to ceding control over how users interact with an app's functions.

marsbit7m ago

Apple Also Has to Pay Rent Now

marsbit7m ago

Missed the SpaceX IPO? WEEX's "First Trade Protection" Lets You Experience US Stock Trading Risk-Free.

With the excitement around SpaceX's recent public listing reigniting interest in the US stock market, Chinese investors face significant challenges accessing compliant and convenient trading channels following regulatory actions against major online brokers. This article explores the available options, highlighting their risks and limitations. Traditional paths for US stock investments remain problematic. Qualified Domestic Institutional Investor (QDII) and Listed Open-Ended Fund (LOF) products, while compliant, suffer from high fees, significant purchase premiums, and a very limited selection of assets. Small, unregulated offshore brokers pose substantial risks, including potential insolvency. While secure, VIP accounts at banks in Hong Kong or Singapore require high minimum deposits (often 1-2 million RMB) and in-person visits, placing them out of reach for most retail investors. The article positions cryptocurrency exchanges, specifically their TradFi (traditional finance on-chain) offerings, as a compelling alternative. Platforms like WEEX are noted for providing access to a wide range of US stocks and ETFs, including SpaceX (SPCXON), through tokenized assets. This method offers advantages such as a single account for both crypto and traditional assets, USDT-based settlement avoiding fiat complexities, flexible leverage, and robust risk management. To attract users, WEEX is promoting a "First Trade Guarantee" campaign. Running from June 15 to July 8 (UTC+8), it features a $30,000 prize pool. Users who trade $500 worth of US stock contracts can qualify for a guarantee on their first eligible trade: 100% loss coverage up to $30 or a 20% bonus on profits up to $30. The campaign is presented as a low-risk opportunity for both crypto natives and traditional investors to experience US stock trading.

marsbit9m ago

Missed the SpaceX IPO? WEEX's "First Trade Protection" Lets You Experience US Stock Trading Risk-Free.

marsbit9m ago

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

How Hard Is It to Make a Chip? A Division Error Cost $475 Million Chip expert Shi Kan, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Sciences and a popular tech creator, explains the immense challenges of chip development. Chips are foundational to modern technology, but their creation is extraordinarily difficult. The journey from sand to a functional chip involves complex design and manufacturing, but a critical bottleneck is verification—ensuring the design works flawlessly before costly production. A single, undetected bug can have catastrophic consequences, as illustrated by the infamous 1994 Intel Pentium FDIV bug. A flaw in the floating-point division unit forced a recall costing $475 million. Unlike software, chips cannot be easily patched after manufacture, making "first-time success" paramount. However, industry surveys show only 24% of chip projects achieve this; over three-quarters require at least one costly re-spin due to design flaws. Verification has thus become the dominant phase, consuming up to 70% of the design cycle. The core challenge is a "verification impossible triangle" between high performance, good debuggability, and low cost. Exhaustively verifying a modern CPU core could take 15,000 years with software simulation, or 30 years with advanced hardware emulation—timeframes utterly impractical for development. Despite being essential, verification is often seen as unglamorous "dirty work," receiving less academic attention than fields like AI. Shi and his team are tackling this by developing an agile verification research framework called ENCORE, based on FPGA technology, to improve verification efficiency and debug capability. Beyond research, Shi engages in public science communication through long-form video content, aiming to demystify chip technology, AI, and computer science. He argues for the value of pursuing "hard and long-term" endeavors, whether in the meticulous world of chip verification or in creating substantive educational content, believing such sustained effort is likely the right path forward.

marsbit19m ago

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

marsbit19m ago

Blockchain Has Finally Started to Sail into the Mainstream After 18 Years

Blockchain Finds Its True Path After 18 Years: Becoming the Financial Backbone for AI Agents and Autonomy This analysis explores a pivotal shift in the blockchain and crypto investment landscape, driven by the dominance of AI. Major venture capital firms, including Variant, Paradigm, Haun Ventures, and YZi Labs, are moving beyond pure "crypto" investment theses. They are expanding their focus to AI, robotics, and frontier tech, signaling that blockchain is no longer seen as a standalone sector but as an underlying infrastructure layer. The core argument is that blockchain's killer application may not be user-facing apps, but rather providing the economic rails for the coming wave of AI agents, autonomous robots, and automated systems. Key capabilities like self-custody wallets, programmable stablecoins for micropayments, on-chain identity, and verifiable smart contracts are positioned as essential for a future where machines conduct economic activity. The recent $1.4 billion investment by Tether (via its venture arm) in German robotics company NEURA Robotics exemplifies this, aiming to embed Tether's wallet tools directly into robots for autonomous transactions. While many "AI + Crypto" projects remain superficial, the article concludes that true value lies where crypto is a necessary component—enabling machine-to-machine payments, agent autonomy, verifiable data provenance, and open financial settlement for the AI era. For crypto venture capital, this convergence with AI represents both an adaptation to shifting capital flows and a potential path to unlocking the large-scale, non-speculative utility the industry has long sought.

marsbit39m ago

Blockchain Has Finally Started to Sail into the Mainstream After 18 Years

marsbit39m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片