NFL urges Supreme Court to take up prediction market dispute

The NFL urged the Supreme Court on Thursday to take up a case over who has the authority to regulate prediction markets, arguing that wagers on the platforms should fall under state gambling laws.

The league filed an amicus brief as part of a dispute between Kalshi and the state of New Jersey, which has asked the justices to weigh in on the issue that has produced conflicting decisions at the appellate level.

“This split of authority, and the consequent uncertainty about the regulatory oversight of sports wagering on DCMs [designated contract markets], pose a significant challenge to the NFL’s game-integrity and consumer-protection efforts,” it wrote in Thursday’s filing.

Kalshi and other prediction markets argue that the wagers they offer are financial instruments known as “swaps” and are federally regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

States, by contrast, view this as gambling and contend it should fall under their jurisdiction.

Under the Trump administration, the CFTC has weighed in on the dispute in favor of prediction markets, bringing numerous lawsuits against states that have moved to enforce their gambling laws against the platforms.

The NFL suggested Thursday there would be “less cause for concern” if the CFTC and prediction markets “were to adopt the same robust safeguards and engage in the same vigorous oversight” as state and tribal regulators and traditional sports betting.

“But that is not what is happening today,” it added.

The league argued the agency and platforms “have stuck to a more laissez-faire approach,” declining to implement a series of prohibited wagers that the NFL requires for sportsbooks and keeping the age limit at 18 rather than 21 years old.

It urged the Supreme Court to take up the case before another season goes by.

“Billions of dollars will be bet on NFL games through prediction markets each season, and any delay from the Court will result in increasing consumer harm and risk to game integrity,” the league wrote.

The NFL also suggested the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals “got it right” when they sided with the states on the issue, arguing that prediction market wagers should not be considered “swaps” under federal law.

A bipartisan group of 39 states similarly filed an amicus brief Thursday urging the Supreme Court to take up the case and backing New Jersey’s argument that states should be able to regulate prediction markets.

Kalshi said in a statement that its “top priority is the integrity of its markets,” underscoring that other major sports leagues have partnered with the company. It also pushed back on the NFL’s characterization of CFTC enforcement, arguing the agency is “actively policing sports-related markets.”

“The CFTC’s ongoing rulemaking addresses many of the NFL’s supposed concerns,” Kalshi added. “And those rules sit atop the same comprehensive system of federal enforcement that protects trillions of dollars of transactions in US markets.”