Legal

Attorney slams Ninth Circuit ruling that sports event contracts escape CFTC oversight

Published Aug 28, 2026

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that sports-related event contracts are not swaps, contradicting a Third Circuit decision and creating a circuit split on how federal derivatives law classifies such contracts. Attorney Ariel Givner criticized the ruling on X, arguing that sports event contracts listed on a designated contract market are derivatives and that CFTC oversight should replace 50 separate state regimes.

Why this matters?

The circuit split gives Kalshi a narrow path to Supreme Court review, but that timeline stretches years. Until then, the Ninth Circuit loss emboldens state attorneys general who have already sued or blocked Kalshi in Nevada, Michigan, Washington, Connecticut, New York, Wisconsin, and Utah. Each state victory fragments the national market further and forces Kalshi toward costly geofencing or voided contracts.

Polymarket and Novig face identical exposure, yet Kalshi's higher profile makes it the test case states target first. Traders now hold contracts whose validity depends on geography rather than federal designation. Legal spend multiplies across parallel dockets while the preemption shield that justified Kalshi's national launch keeps eroding. A second circuit loss would trigger copycat filings and accelerate the fragmentation.

Add Prediction News as a preferred source on GoogleGet our prediction-market coverage prioritized in your search results

Related Stories

More in Legal
Legal

Appeals court rejects Kalshi bid to block Nevada gaming oversight

Legal

Ninth Circuit rules Kalshi sports contracts are gambling, not swaps

Legal

CME and Kalshi executives clash at CFTC as New York seeks $36B in damages

Breaking

Ninth Circuit rejects Kalshi's injunction bid against Nevada gaming regulators

Legal

Ninth Circuit backs Nevada over Kalshi as Connecticut files suit

Legal

Connecticut sues Kalshi to block sports event contracts