1. What is the legal fight between Crypto.com’s NADEX and Nevada regulators about?

Crypto.com, operating its derivatives exchange NADEX, is challenging restrictions from the Nevada Gaming Control Board on its prediction markets platform. Nevada argues these sports-related contracts are illegal gambling under state law. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) says they are federally regulated event contracts, not state-regulated bets.

2. Why is the CFTC backing Crypto.com (NADEX) in this case?

The CFTC filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit case North American Derivatives Exchange v. State of Nevada, asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction over exchange-listed event contracts. The agency argues these contracts qualify as swaps under federal law. That would place them under CFTC oversight rather than state gambling regulators.

3. What makes this CFTC intervention unusual?

Rob Schwartz, a former CFTC General Counsel, said direct federal-state clashes like this have not previously played out in court between both levels of government. He described the current environment as a “direct conflict” driven by widespread litigation and courts curtailing the CFTC’s authority. The agency’s leadership has now made defending its jurisdiction a priority.

4. How does Nevada view prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket?

Nevada regulators argue that sports-based prediction markets function as gambling platforms subject to state gaming laws. They claim platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket are effectively offering sports bets. Critics like former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie say, “If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck… It's a sports bet.”

5. What is at stake for Crypto.com and other prediction market platforms?

If courts side with Nevada, states could impose gambling regulations or outright bans on sports prediction markets. That could raise compliance costs, restrict market access, and reduce revenue potential. If the CFTC prevails, platforms would operate under a single federal framework instead of a patchwork of state rules.

6. Could this case go to the U.S. Supreme Court?

Legal experts believe the dispute could reach the Supreme Court because lower courts are already split on similar jurisdiction issues. Schwartz said significant economic interests and federalism concerns make Supreme Court review likely. A high court ruling would set a national precedent on whether these products are derivatives or gambling.

7. How might this legal battle affect Crypto.com users and traders?

In the short term, users in certain states could face access restrictions or uncertainty depending on local rulings. In the medium term, a federal win for the CFTC could provide clearer nationwide rules, which may support growth. A state-level win could limit product availability and slow expansion.

8. Does this case change the investment thesis for prediction markets?

The core thesis for prediction markets is that they are regulated financial contracts offering hedging and price discovery. This case adds regulatory risk, especially around sports-related contracts. That risk is material but not fatal unless courts broadly reclassify event contracts as gambling.

Cryptocurrency

Image for illustrative purposes only. Not a real photo.

CFTC backs Crypto.com in Nevada clash

Written by Isaac FrancisPublished Feb 25, 2026, 12:00 AMLast Updated Feb 24, 2026, 10:42 PM

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission has filed an amicus brief backing Crypto.com in a Ninth Circuit appeal against Nevada regulators, arguing that sports-based prediction markets fall under exclusive federal jurisdiction rather than state gambling laws.

In North American Derivatives Exchange v The State of Nevada, Crypto.com, operating as NADEX, is challenging restrictions imposed by the Nevada Gaming Control Board, which claims platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket are offering illegal sports gambling.

The CFTC maintains that exchange-listed event contracts qualify as federally regulated swaps, not state-regulated bets, setting up a direct conflict over whether prediction markets are derivatives or gambling products.

“This has never happened before,”

Said Rob Schwartz, Partner at Morgan Lewis and former CFTC General Counsel, describing the case as an unprecedented head-to-head clash between federal derivatives oversight and state gaming authority.

CFTC Chair Mike Selig reinforced the agency’s position in a Wall Street Journal op-ed and television appearances, stating:

“The CFTC will no longer sit idly by while overzealous state governments undermine the agency’s exclusive jurisdiction over these markets by seeking to establish statewide prohibitions on these exciting products.”

Nevada officials and American Gaming Association adviser Chris Christie have countered that platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket are effectively unregulated sports bets that threaten state revenues and sports integrity, arguing that:

“If a product walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck… It's a sports bet.”

Legal experts say the dispute could ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court as lower courts split on the jurisdictional question, raising the prospect of a landmark ruling that would determine whether prediction markets operate under a single federal regime or a fragmented state-by-state framework.

CFTC backs Crypto.com in Nevada clash

Frequently asked questions

CFTC backs Crypto.com in Nevada clash

Frequently asked questions