Latest
Checked Oct. 21, 2026
The CFTC treats event contracts as derivatives. States are suing, ordering shutdowns and passing laws. We track every state, every case and every open legal question to the docket that will settle it.
From public records, 51 jurisdictions
Has the state taken public action on prediction markets?
Each question closes when a court or agency acts. We record the outcome and link the order. We don't publish odds.
Next: New York's optional reply on the CFTC's new rules due Oct. 231 day
Argued Sept. 14Oct. 23
Resolves Yes if the court grants the federal government's preliminary injunction motion in United States v. New York, in whole or in part. No if it denies it.
S.D.N.Y. No. 1:26-cv-03404. Source: DeFi Rate tracker
Next: Kalshi's response due Nov. 918 days
Docketed Sept. 8Nov. 9
Resolves Yes if the Court grants review in Flaherty v. KalshiEX, No if it denies the petition.
Supreme Court No. 26-299. Source: Supreme Court docket
Next: show-cause hearing Nov. 2433 days
Motion filed Sept. 29Nov. 24
Resolves Yes if the Ingham County court finds Kalshi in civil contempt of its Sept. 1 injunction, No if it declines.
Ingham County Circuit Court No. 26-1087-CZ. Source: DeFi Rate
No decision date set168 days since argument
Argued May 7Pending
Resolves Yes if the court reverses or vacates the denial of Kalshi's preliminary injunction in KalshiEX v. Martin, No if it affirms.
Fourth Circuit No. 25-1892. Source: Court docket
No decision date set87 days since comments closed
Comments closed July 27Pending
Resolves Yes if the CFTC publishes a final rule (RIN 3038-AF65) in the Federal Register, No if it withdraws the proposal.
Federal Register, 91 FR 35806. Source: Federal Register (PDF)
No decision date set13 days since the petition
Petition filed Oct. 9Pending
Resolves Yes if the court grants panel rehearing or rehearing en banc in KalshiEX v. Schuler and KalshiEX v. Orgel, No if it denies both.
Sixth Circuit Nos. 26-3196 and 26-5235. Source: Kalshi's petition (PDF)
Not a prediction market. Nothing on this site is an offer to trade, and we don't take positions or publish forecasts.
Attorney General Brown sued Kalshi, four Kalshi subsidiaries and two Pennsylvania-based trading firms that supply pricing and liquidity in Utah's Third District Court, alleging that Kalshi operates as an unlicensed gambling business. The state seeks an order barring Kalshi from taking Utah wagers, enforced through a court-approved geolocation tool, plus fees it estimates at $30.6 million to $61.2 million and about $5.5 million in restitution for Utah users' losses.
Source: The Salt Lake Tribune
A voter, Joseph Giganti Sr., filed a federal civil-rights suit against Elections Commission members challenging the view that buying election contracts could disqualify him from voting (date per DeFi Rate's docket tracker).
Source: DeFi Rate legal tracker
Novig's exchange, Ludlow Exchange, sued the attorney general and Gaming Commission officials in the Eastern District of Missouri, arguing the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction.
Source: DeFi Rate tracker sources page
North American Derivatives Exchange (OG.com Prediction Markets, Crypto.com's exchange) sued in the Western District of Missouri, also arguing federal preemption.
Source: DeFi Rate tracker sources page
At the Oct. 16 compliance deadline, most of the ten recipients were still offering sports contracts in Ohio, according to local reporting; Plus500US told the commission it would stop. Gov. Mike DeWine said the state would file lawsuits, and Attorney General Andy Wilson said the state could seek to recover the companies' Ohio revenue.
Source: News 5 Cleveland (WEWS)
Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins recommended granting Kentucky's motion to send its QCX case back to state court; the district judge has not yet ruled.
Source: DeFi Rate tracker sources page
| Case | Court | Status | Latest |
|---|---|---|---|
| Utah v. Kalshi (Salt Lake County)Derek Brown v. Kalshi Inc. | Utah Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County | Pending | Oct. 20, 2026 |
| Polymarket US v. Ohio (S.D. Ohio)QCX LLC v. Wilson | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio2:26-cv-01502 | Pending | Oct. 19, 2026 |
| Crypto.com (OG) v. Missouri (W.D. Mo.)North American Derivatives Exchange, Inc. v. Hanaway | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri4:26-cv-00969 | Pending | Oct. 16, 2026 |
| Novig v. Missouri (E.D. Mo.)Ludlow Exchange, LLC v. Hanaway | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri4:26-cv-01780 | Pending | Oct. 16, 2026 |
| California tribes v. Kalshi and RobinhoodBlue Lake Rancheria, et al. v. Kalshi, Inc., et al. | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (on remand from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit)3:25-cv-06162-JSC (N.D. Cal.); 25-7504 (9th Cir.) | Remanded | October 2026 |
| Hughes v. DraftKings, Polymarket and others (South Carolina)Hughes v. DraftKings Inc., et al. | U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina (removed from the Charleston County Court of Common Pleas)2:26-cv-03838; 2026CP1004063 (Charleston County) | Pending | October 2026 |
Each state gets the first category that applies, in this order. Read the methodology.