NFL takes conflict over who should regulate Kalshi and Polymarket betting to the Supreme Court
The U.S. league is asking the Supreme Court to determine whether these markets linked to sports results should be exclusively under federal financial supervision or also subject to state gambling laws.
The NFL has entered the regulatory battle of prediction markets in the United States and has asked the Supreme Court to review the conflict over who should control contracts linked to sporting events.
The underlying issue pits two models against each other. On the one hand, platforms such as Kalshi maintain that their contracts are financial products regulated at the federal level by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). On the other hand, several states consider that, when these contracts refer to sports results, they function in practice as bets and should also be subject to state gambling legislation.
The NFL has now aligned itself with those who are calling for Supreme Court intervention. The league has filed a brief in support of the New Jersey authorities' request for the high court to study the case.
One of their main arguments is that the CFTC may not have enough resources and specialized personnel to adequately oversee a fast-growing sports market.
The NFL also focuses on issues that are particularly sensitive to the traditional betting industry, such as competition integrity, age restrictions, insider trading, and responsible gaming mechanisms.
The issue has gained even more relevance after a federal appeals court recently ruled that Ohio and Tennessee can apply their gambling laws to prediction markets, a decision contrary to Kalshi's position.
The conflict directly affects one of the great regulatory debates of the moment: where a financial market ends and where a sports bet begins.
And the dispute no longer affects only Kalshi. Polymarket also has legal confrontations with different US state authorities over the nature of its contracts and who has the competence to regulate them.
