Story perspectives

6th Circuit Lets Ohio, Tennessee Regulate Kalshi Contracts

By Drooid · Sep 26, 2026, 9:56 PM UTC · How we work

Summary

6th Circuit Regulates Kalshi

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Ohio and Tennessee can regulate Kalshi’s sports-event contracts under state gambling laws.
The panel unanimously found Kalshi did not demonstrate its contracts are swaps.
The ruling overturns a Tennessee district court decision and mirrors a 9th Circuit ruling.
The split may lead to U.S. Supreme Court review of the gambling-law conflict.

Summary

Hochul Warns Polymarket

CME Group CEO Terry Duffy warned that regulated prediction markets could create a bubble like the 2007 housing crisis.
Governor Kathy Hochul said Polymarket’s unlicensed operation endangers New Yorkers, especially underage users, by exposing them to problem gambling.
Kalshi claims prediction contracts are derivatives, invoking CFTC jurisdiction under Dodd-Frank for federal oversight.
The 1936 Commodity Exchange Act originally targeted agricultural price discovery, not modern sports-event betting.

History

Historical Context

The 1961 Federal Wire Act, passed by Congress, prohibited interstate transmission of gambling information and sparked decades of jurisdictional battles. In 2007, the housing market collapsed, wiping out $1.5 trillion in equity, a downturn Terry Duffy later cited as a bubble warning. Today, the 6th Circuit and the CFTC echo that conflict, ruling Ohio and Tennessee can treat Kalshi’s prediction contracts as gambling under state law. The precedent suggests the U.S. Supreme Court may soon resolve the split, shaping nationwide regulation of platforms like Polymarket and CME Group.

1 of 3

6th Circuit Regulates Kalshi

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Ohio and Tennessee can regulate Kalshi’s sports-event contracts under state gambling laws.
The panel unanimously found Kalshi did not demonstrate its contracts are swaps.
The ruling overturns a Tennessee district court decision and mirrors a 9th Circuit ruling.
The split may lead to U.S. Supreme Court review of the gambling-law conflict.

1 / 3