Kalshi and Nevada Regulatory Dispute: A Constitutional Clash Between Federal and State Power

In March 2025, the Nevada Gaming Control Board issued Kalshi its first cease-and-desist order, setting off a legal standoff that has lasted more than a year. The core dispute is this: Kalshi argues that its “event contracts” are “swaps” that fall under CFTC jurisdiction and should be subject to exclusive federal oversight; meanwhile, Nevada contends that these contracts are “no different in substance” from sports betting and must obtain a state gaming license in order to operate.

In November 2025, Federal Judge Andrew Gordon issued a key ruling, finding that Kalshi’s sports-related event contracts are not swaps under CFTC jurisdiction, but are instead substantive gambling activities. In February 2026, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that position, clearing the way for Nevada’s enforcement. In March, Carson City Judge Jason Woodbury issued a 14-day temporary restraining order; it was then extended and followed by a preliminary injunction requiring Kalshi to implement geofencing technology to block users in Nevada by May 4.

On April 17, 2026, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held oral arguments in this case, and no immediate decision was issued after the hearing. Notably, legal views are divided: in the same month, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling favorable to Kalshi, holding that New Jersey lacks the authority to regulate it, creating a stark conflict with the Ninth Circuit.

This case could have far-reaching effects. Nevada says that if Kalshi prevails, the CFTC would become the “nationwide gambling regulator,” directly eroding states’ regulatory sovereignty in the sports betting sector. Kalshi’s lawyers, meanwhile, emphasize the need to avoid conflicting conclusions between state courts and federal courts. Coinbase Chief Legal Officer Paul Grewal predicts that the case will ultimately be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which will decide whether sports contracts are solely subject to CFTC jurisdiction. More than 20 states have challenged prediction markets, and this case will determine where the industry’s compliance framework goes next.#kalshi与内华达州的监管权争议