Major win for Kalshi today.
14 states, the CFTC, and billion dollar companies are in a knife fight over the definition of a swap:
- Does a sports game have economic consequence?
- Does the game need to directly drive that consequence, or can it be indirect?
The Third Circuit sided with Kalshi today vs. New Jersey:
- Sports games do have economic consequences. e.g. sponsors, TV deals
- Indirect consequences count
This is significant because it's the first federal appeals court to rule on this question, and it sides with Kalshi over state regulators.
The courts are split overall:
- Kalshi won in NJ, Tennessee, Northern California
- States won in Ohio, Massachusetts, Nevada
- CFTC is suing Arizona, Illinois, Connecticut on Kalshi's behalf
This is likely headed to the Supreme Court. The fate of prediction markets rests on this ruling.