What happened between the CFTC and Kalshi in Ohio?

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission backed prediction market platform Kalshi in a legal dispute with Ohio regulators over sports-related event contracts. The CFTC filed an amicus brief arguing Ohio is overstepping federal authority by treating Kalshi’s products as unlicensed gambling instead of federally regulated derivatives.

Why does the Kalshi vs Ohio case matter for prediction markets?

The case could help determine whether prediction markets are mainly regulated by federal derivatives law or state gambling laws. That matters because platforms like Kalshi operate across multiple US states and could face major restrictions if states gain broader authority to block or regulate contracts.

What is Kalshi being accused of by Ohio regulators?

Ohio officials claim Kalshi is effectively offering unlicensed sports betting products under state gambling laws. Regulators argue that event contracts tied to sports outcomes function similarly to wagers traditionally overseen by state gaming authorities.

Why is the CFTC supporting Kalshi?

The CFTC says prediction markets fall under its federal jurisdiction because these contracts are traded across state lines as derivatives products. CFTC Chair Michael Selig argued the Ohio court took an “improperly narrow view” of the agency’s authority.

How could this legal fight affect prediction market companies?

A win for Kalshi and the CFTC could strengthen the legal position of prediction market platforms across the US. A loss could increase state-level enforcement risks and potentially force companies to limit certain contracts or exit some markets.

Why have prediction markets become more popular recently?

Prediction markets surged in visibility during and after the 2024 US presidential election cycle as traders increasingly used event contracts to speculate on political and economic outcomes. Retail traders have also shown growing interest in these platforms as alternatives to traditional betting or financial markets.

What are the main bull and bear cases for prediction markets after this news?

The bullish view is that stronger federal backing from the CFTC could legitimise prediction markets and support long-term industry growth. The bearish view is that ongoing legal fights with multiple states could create years of uncertainty, higher compliance costs and possible restrictions on key products.

Which states are involved in disputes with the CFTC over prediction markets?

The CFTC has recently sued Wisconsin, Illinois, Arizona, Connecticut and New York over similar jurisdictional disputes tied to prediction markets. Multiple state attorneys general are also supporting separate legal actions arguing these products may violate local gambling laws.

CFTC backs Kalshi in Ohio markets fight

Written by Jon CuthbertPublished May. 13 2026

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission backed prediction market platform Kalshi in its legal battle with Ohio, arguing the state is improperly attempting to regulate federally overseen derivatives markets.

The CFTC filed an amicus brief in the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on Tuesday challenging Ohio’s complaint against Kalshi, which accused the platform of operating unlicensed sports betting products under state gambling laws.

“The federal district court in Ohio took an improperly narrow view of the Commission’s jurisdiction, and we are asking the Court of Appeals to correct that error,”

Said CFTC Chair Michael Selig.

The filing follows a March ruling by Chief Judge Sarah D. Morrison of the US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio denying Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction after the court questioned whether Congress intended to preempt state sports gambling laws.

Selig said prediction markets require federal oversight because participants trade across state lines and warned that state-level enforcement actions could undermine the CFTC’s longstanding authority over derivatives products.

The legal clash comes as prediction markets have rapidly expanded in popularity since the 2024 US presidential election cycle, with the CFTC recently suing Wisconsin, Illinois, Arizona, Connecticut and New York over similar jurisdictional disputes.

New York Attorney General Letitia James and 37 other attorneys general last month backed Massachusetts’ lawsuit against Kalshi, arguing prediction market platforms cannot bypass state gambling laws designed to protect consumers.