The National Football League (NFL) largely sided with New Jersey officials in their petition for the Supreme Court to consider a case on sports bets through prediction markets platforms
In an amicus brief filed with the US Supreme Court on Wednesday, the NFL called on the justices to grant a petition for a writ of certiorari from New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport and gaming enforcement interim director Mary Jo Flaherty. The filing came in response to New Jersey officials petitioning the court to consider its case against Kalshi, potentially resolving whether the jurisdiction of prediction market companies falls under state authorities or federal agencies.
The football league supported many of the New Jersey authorities’ arguments, including that the case addresses potential issues with labeling sporting-event contracts on prediction market platforms as “swaps” and that it should be reviewed to “preserve game integrity” and “protect customers.” The group cited data showing that on the first Sunday of the football season, “more than half of all prediction-markets’ trading volume,” about $1.8 billion of $3.3 billion, related to the NFL.
According to the NFL, many of the sporting event contracts on Kalshi and other platforms were “highly susceptible to manipulation” or “otherwise inherently objectionable.”
“These bets, in the NFL’s view, pose the greatest threats to game integrity, because many can be manipulated by a single person, especially if known in advance—for instance, a player can alter his performance, a coach can change his team’s lineup, or an official can make (or not make) certain calls,” said the amicus brief.
Event contract on 2027 Super Bowl. Source: Kalshi
Related: New York sues Polymarket over alleged illegal gambling business
Also at issue, according to the NFL, was the lack of what it called “sensible safeguards” for event contracts from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Federalizing sports betting regulation, rather than leaving it to individual US state authorities, was a “major question” the Supreme Court should consider.
As of Thursday, the Supreme Court had not announced whether it planned to grant review of the case. Kalshi was granted an extension to respond to the New Jersey filing, giving the company until Nov. 9 to address issues related to jurisdiction, manipulable event contracts, and consumer protection.
States want clarification from SCOTUS on prediction markets
On Wednesday, 39 US states and the District of Columbia also filed an amicus brief supporting New Jersey’s position, saying the conflict between the CFTC and state authorities over prediction markets had resulted in a “national turf war” that could not be resolved without an answer from the Supreme Court.
“Waiting too long to address this issue will permit the federal-state regulatory dispute to escalate,” said the filing. “The ongoing power struggle between the States and the CFTC highlights the unpredictability about what law applies—and to whom. Whether in this case, or in one of the many more cases sure to come, this Court should step in, resolve the circuit split, provide guidance to lower courts, clarify the CFTC’s authority, and provide the badly needed answer to the Question Presented.”
Kalshi spokesperson Dani Lever told Cointelegraph after the September New Jersey filing that the company could not be “regulated by 50 different regulators.“
Whether the Supreme Court justices will take up the issue of prediction markets is unclear. While New Jersey officials were the first to petition the high court to consider the Kalshi case, there were many examples of state-level actions against prediction market companies that could still face appeal.
Magazine: Crypto lending rises again… but have they solved the risks?
