Prediction Markets Sites Petition Supreme Court
Mike Goodpaster Published 18/09/2026
Prediction market sites Robinhood and Crypto.com are seeking to take the debate over sports-event contracts to the Supreme Court. Prediction market sites Robinhood and Crypto.com are petitioning the highest court in the land over the issue of whether they can be state-regulated. The ongoing argument with prediction market sports-event contracts put forth by state gambling regulators is that they are sports betting and should be under state regulation. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the federal regulator, counters that they are derivative trades and thus under federal regulation.
Both sides of this issue are seeking to fast-track it to the Supreme Court for the ultimate answer.
Robinhood and Crypto.com file separate Supreme Court petitions
Robinhood and Crypto.com filed separate petitions with the Supreme Court. Both petitions are asking the highest court in the land to resolve a Ninth Circuit Court split over whether federal law preempts state gambling restrictions on sports-event contracts.
In its filing, Robinhood Derivatives submitted a petition for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking “collective review” of cases involving prediction markets regulation, which it believes “rightly sits with the CFTC.” The petition was filed on September 10.
“The Supreme Court now has the opportunity to provide clarity on the regulation of prediction markets, which we believe rightly sits with the CFTC,” said a Robinhood spokesperson in an emailed statement to Securities Regulation Daily, according to reporting by VitalLaw. “It’s our position that the Court should review these cases collectively as we seek to ensure every eligible customer has access to these markets as a tool to aggregate dispersed information, hedge risk, and speculate on their beliefs about future events.”
Prediction market sites take issue with a Ninth Circuit Court ruling
At issue is an August 28 Ninth Circuit Court ruling in Nevada. In that case, a three-judge panel ruled against lawyers representing Robinhood, Crypto.com, and Kalshi. By a 3-0 ruling, the Ninth Circuit Court panel affirmed the Nevada district court’s decision on sports-event contracts. The three-judge panel concluded that the federal Commodity Exchange Act likely did not preempt Nevada laws because Kalshi’s event contracts are not swaps and a CFTC rule prohibits the listing of contracts based on gaming,
The court held that Kalshi did not show a likelihood that the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) preempts state gaming regulations as applied to sports-event contracts. Citing Kalshi's own marketing, the panel noted that Kalshi has advertised offering “the first app for legal sports betting in all 50 states.”
Kalshi filed petitions on September 9 for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc.
New Jersey is also petitioning the Supreme Court
These petitions follow a Supreme Court petition filed earlier this month by New Jersey's attorney general. The Garden State is also seeking an answer to the federal vs. state regulations governing sports-event contracts offered by prediction market sites.
In a rare win for the prediction market sites, a federal district judge blocked New Jersey from taking regulatory action against Kalshi. In April, the Philadelphia-based 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling in a 2-1 decision.
New Jersey is seeking a final answer from the Supreme Court.
“Companies like Kalshi claim to offer legal sports betting in all 50 States, but they refuse to follow the gambling laws of any State,” New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport said in a statement about the filing of the petition. “These companies have no right to offer their sports bets without following state law, which is why dozens of States across the ideological spectrum have opposed them.
"We’re calling on the Supreme Court to resolve this issue and recognize that Congress did not silently make the sports-betting industry immune from state law."