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

TheNewsCryptoPublicado em 2026-03-20Última atualização em 2026-03-20

Resumo

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

Perguntas relacionadas

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.

Leituras Relacionadas

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

China's A-share market recently faced selling pressure, especially in tech sectors, initially triggered by a global tech sell-off that began in South Korea. However, the article argues this is a case of "mistaken injury" and highlights the market's underlying resilience. This resilience stems from three main pillars: **1) Tech Sector Fundamentals:** Unlike Korea's market dominated by a few memory chip stocks, China's tech sector is diversified across computing, communications, electronics, and semiconductors, supported by dual narratives of global AI supply chains and domestic substitution. Core areas like optical modules and fiber optics continue to show strong earnings growth. **2) "National Team" Support:** State-backed institutions and large corporations have made significant market purchases and announced buybacks, providing liquidity and signaling confidence. This is seen as a stabilizing policy signal, often associated with market bottoms. **3) Broader Market Pillars:** Other major sectors are showing endogenous recovery momentum. Consumer stocks benefit from stabilizing CPI and signs of sector recovery (e.g., liquor price hikes). Cyclical sectors like aluminum have high earnings, potential price increases due to tight supply, and low valuations. The financial sector offers stable dividends and low valuations. The conclusion is that the sell-off was driven by external contagion, not a collapse in fundamentals. With strong policy support and recovering momentum across key sectors, the A-share market possesses the toughness to regain stability.

marsbitHá 12m

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbitHá 12m

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

The U.S. Congress is struggling to advance the crypto market structure bill known as the Clarity Act, with bipartisan compromise proving difficult. Key hurdles include unresolved disputes over "yield" products and, more critically, the inclusion of strong ethics provisions for elected officials—a non-negotiable demand for many Democrats. While a compromise on yield was reached in May, securing only limited Democratic support in committee, the separate Senate Agriculture Committee version later passed with no Democratic votes due to the ethics impasse. As Republicans push for a full Senate vote in July, demands for ethics rules have expanded, and other contentious issues like developer protections and concerns from law enforcement and large banks further complicate negotiations. Despite consensus on the need for legislation, the path forward is unclear. Recent discussions between senators and White House officials aim to find acceptable ethics language. Some lawmakers question whether a compromise text can garner enough bipartisan support, with one Democrat stating the current proposal lacks the strong ethics provisions required for their vote. Potential short-term goals for the crypto community include symbolic Senate action before the August recess, a longer-term aim for passage by 2026, or establishing a detailed framework that addresses ethics and other compromises. The process remains arduous, relying on the traditional, vote-by-vote effort to build bipartisan support.

marsbitHá 31m

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

marsbitHá 31m

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

"The Rivalry Between Kalshi and Polymarket Founders Turns Bitter and Litigious" The intense feud between Tarek Mansour, CEO of Kalshi, and Shayne Coplan, founder of Polymarket, has escalated far beyond typical business competition into personal animosity and regulatory battles. Both lead billion-dollar prediction market platforms, but their approaches differ sharply. Kalshi positions itself as the compliant operator, securing U.S. regulatory approval before launching. In contrast, Polymarket initially operated offshore, allowing U.S. users to access its platform via VPN, which drew regulatory scrutiny. The conflict reached a peak in November 2024 when FBI agents raided Coplan's New York apartment. While Coplan publicly blamed political motives, his team privately suspected Kalshi was involved. According to sources, Kalshi's lawyers had previously reported Polymarket's operations to federal prosecutors, highlighting its accessibility to U.S. users despite a ban. This incident fueled mutual accusations and underhanded tactics, including social media smear campaigns and attempts to sabotage each other's major business deals. Their rivalry also played out in Washington, influencing regulatory debates. Kalshi actively lobbied against Polymarket's practices, framing them as illegal and unethical. Polymarket, after facing a CFTC fine and investigation, later acquired a licensed U.S. firm to launch a domestic app, regaining a foothold. Despite the hostility, both companies have seen massive growth, with combined trading volumes soaring. However, increased regulatory scrutiny, particularly around insider trading on Polymarket's platform, continues to pose challenges. The founders' deep-seated mutual disdain ensures their battle for market dominance remains as much a personal vendetta as a commercial one.

marsbitHá 40m

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

marsbitHá 40m

Trading

Spot
活动图片