Legal

CFTC says it should never have sued Gemini, joins motion to vacate $5M consent order

Published May 28, 2026Updated 142d ago

The CFTC moved on May 28, 2026 to vacate a $5 million consent order against Gemini, filing a court request stating it should never have sued the crypto exchange and no longer considers the settlement terms fair. The agency joined Gemini's motion to erase the prior judgment, following staff changes that included departures of officials tied to enforcement actions against crypto firms. Gemini-affiliated prediction market Gemini Titan was noted in related context as among entities suspended, investigated, or pushed out amid that regulatory pressure. CoinDesk reported the filing signals the CFTC is advancing toward a broader federal framework for event contracts tied to elections, gaming, and sports.

Why this matters?

Any court grant of the vacatur erases the CFTC's only consent-order resolution against a crypto exchange that also operates a prediction market, stripping the agency of precedent it could cite in its active preemption defense alongside Kalshi and Polymarket in Ohio, Wisconsin, and Minnesota.

The bigger picture

Brings to three the running cluster count on CFTC staff turmoil and its collision with state enforcement, after parallel coverage on suspended whistleblowers and the White House review of Chair Selig's prediction-markets rule.

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

Related Stories

More in Legal
Legal

CFTC proposes swaps rules to classify event contracts under federal oversight

Legal

Kalshi petitions full Sixth Circuit as NFL amicus deepens event-contract circuit split

Legal

CFTC proposes rule to classify certain event contracts as swaps

Legal

NFL urges Supreme Court to let states regulate prediction markets as gambling

Legal

Kalshi adds anti-harassment rulebook as CEO warns states may push markets offshore

Legal

CFTC Iran trade probe fuels agency insider-trading enforcement doubts