TLDR
- A federal judge in Ohio determined that Kalshi’s sports-based prediction markets constitute gambling activities subject to state regulations.
- Kalshi’s claim that its products qualify as federally-regulated “swaps” under commodity law was dismissed by the court.
- Ohio’s Attorney General Dave Yost celebrated the decision as a significant victory for the state on social platforms.
- The prediction market company intends to challenge the ruling, citing a contradictory Tennessee federal court decision.
- State regulators in Massachusetts and Nevada have similarly prevailed against Kalshi in comparable legal disputes.
A federal court in Ohio delivered a significant legal setback to Kalshi, the New York-headquartered prediction market operator, this week. The ruling classified the platform’s sports-oriented markets as gambling operations requiring compliance with state regulations.
U.S. District Judge Sarah Morrison rejected Kalshi’s petition for injunctive relief against the Ohio Casino Control Commission. State regulators had been pursuing enforcement action to prevent Kalshi from functioning as an unlicensed sports betting operation within Ohio’s borders.
The company’s defense centered on characterizing its offerings as “swaps” — financial derivatives governed by federal authority through the Commodity Exchange Act. Judge Morrison found this argument unconvincing.
In her written opinion, Morrison explained that legitimate swaps involve variables such as currency fluctuations, meteorological conditions, and energy pricing — elements with direct connections to commodity valuations. Sports game scores fail to satisfy these criteria, she determined.
“The number of points scored in the Huskies-Bobcats game does not,” she wrote, adding that calling a sports contract a swap would lead to “absurd” results.
The 21-page decision found no legislative intent suggesting Congress meant for federal statutes to supersede state authority over sports wagering.
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost was quick to respond. “Kalshi argued the federal Commodity Exchange Act preempts enforcement of Ohio law. Nope,” he wrote on X. “These ‘prediction markets’ have exploded and look an awful lot like gambling. Big win for Ohio!”
The platform announced its disagreement with the judgment and confirmed plans to pursue an appeal. Company representatives highlighted a contrasting Tennessee decision where a federal judge prevented Nashville authorities from enforcing state gambling statutes against Kalshi’s operations.
A Split in the Courts
Judge Morrison’s decision creates a judicial divide on this issue. While federal tribunals in Tennessee and New Jersey have issued favorable rulings for the prediction market platform, courts in Ohio, Massachusetts, and Nevada have supported state regulatory agencies.
This emerging circuit split could eventually necessitate resolution by appellate courts or potentially the Supreme Court.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission has entered the debate as well. CFTC Chair Michael Selig announced in February his intention to challenge state regulatory efforts targeting prediction markets, asserting they fall under the agency’s “exclusive jurisdiction.”
According to Selig, prediction markets provide ordinary Americans with financial risk management tools and function as accountability mechanisms for media and information sources.
Political Pushback Growing
Not all government officials share this perspective. Utah Governor Spencer Cox declared in February that prediction markets “are destroying the lives of families and countless Americans” and “have no place” in his state.
Kalshi competes in the prediction market space with platforms like Polymarket, offering users the ability to wager on outcomes spanning politics, sports competitions, and global events.
The company initially filed legal action against Ohio regulatory authorities in October. The matter now proceeds to the appellate stage.


