Key Takeaways
- A Nevada court granted a 14-day temporary restraining order against Kalshi on Friday, March 20
- The ban prevents Kalshi from offering sports, entertainment, and election-based contracts within Nevada
- Nevada’s Gaming Control Board initially ordered Kalshi to cease sports contracts in 2025
- Federal regulators at the CFTC claim exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets, creating conflict with state authorities
- Kalshi also faces criminal charges in Arizona for operating without proper gambling licenses
A Nevada court has temporarily blocked prediction market operator Kalshi from providing event contracts within the state. The temporary restraining order, issued Friday, March 20, by Nevada’s First Judicial District Court, remains in effect for a minimum of two weeks.
The judicial order prohibits Kalshi from facilitating contracts related to sports events, entertainment, and elections. Court proceedings will resume on April 3 with a scheduled hearing.
This legal action represents the latest development in an ongoing conflict. Nevada’s Gaming Control Board previously sent a cease-and-desist directive to Kalshi in 2025, demanding the platform discontinue sports-related event contracts within state boundaries.
Kalshi contested the state action, maintaining that federal oversight supersedes state regulatory authority. The platform attempted to transfer the proceedings to federal jurisdiction.
The maneuver proved unsuccessful. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected Kalshi’s request to pause the case on Thursday, returning jurisdiction to Nevada courts.
In issuing the restraining order, the Nevada judge determined that Kalshi’s unlicensed operations prevent the gaming board from fulfilling its regulatory mandate. The court concluded that allowing an “unlicensed participant beyond the Board’s control” undermines the agency’s statutory responsibilities.
Kalshi has not issued a public statement regarding the Nevada decision.
Federal Regulator Asserts Jurisdiction
Meanwhile, federal officials are challenging state enforcement actions. Michael Selig, who chairs the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, has filed court documents asserting that the CFTC—not individual states—possesses regulatory authority over prediction market platforms.
Selig has articulated this position in multiple public forums and committed to ongoing jurisdictional assertion by his agency. The CFTC recently issued regulatory guidance emphasizing that platforms offering event-based contracts must comply with Commodity Exchange Act requirements.
Major League Baseball has aligned with the federal regulatory framework, executing a memorandum of understanding with the CFTC regarding prediction market supervision. The league separately announced a collaborative agreement with Polymarket this week.
Expanding Legal Challenges
Nevada’s action is part of a broader pattern of state enforcement. Arizona’s attorney general filed charges against Kalshi earlier this week, alleging operation of an unlicensed gambling enterprise and illegal election wagering activities.
Tennessee authorities have similarly initiated legal proceedings against prediction market platforms concerning sports event contracts.
Federal legislators have also expressed concerns. In January, Democratic Representative Ritchie Torres proposed legislation restricting how elected officials engage with prediction markets, responding to wagers placed on the potential capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Last week, Democratic members of Congress introduced the “Death Bets Act,” proposing to prohibit prediction market contracts connected to deaths, military conflicts, or political assassinations.
The Nevada court acknowledged that federal preemption questions in this regulatory area remain “nuanced and rapidly evolving.”
The next hearing in Nevada’s case against Kalshi is scheduled for April 3, 2026.
