SLA Get the Verdict
Gambling multi Circuit split — 3d, 6th, 9th

KalshiEX LLC v. state gaming regulators — sports event contracts and CEA preemption

Kalshi Preemption

Stakes

Whether the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling law as applied to sports event contracts. If it does, a federally regulated exchange can offer sports wagering nationwide without a single state licence — including in states that have never legalised it. The Third Circuit said Kalshi is likely right; the Ninth said it is not. That split is the shortest path to Supreme Court review of who regulates sports betting in the United States.

Details

Plaintiffs
KalshiEX LLC
Defendants
New Jersey, Nevada, Ohio, Tennessee, Massachusetts, other state regulators
Venue
3d Cir. (No. 25-1922), 9th Cir. (No. 25-7516), 6th Cir. (Nos. 26-3196, 26-5235, consolidated)
Docket number
25-1922 (3d Cir.); 25-7516 (9th Cir.); 26-3196 and 26-5235, consolidated (6th Cir.)
Posture
Third Circuit affirmed a preliminary injunction for Kalshi on April 6, 2026, holding the contracts are likely swaps under the CEA and that state gambling law is preempted. The Ninth Circuit held on August 28, 2026 that Kalshi had not shown a likelihood of preemption and that dissolving the injunction was not an abuse of discretion. The consolidated Sixth Circuit appeals — KalshiEX LLC v. Schuler, No. 26-3196 (Ohio, filed March 11, 2026) and KalshiEX LLC v. Orgel, No. 26-5235 (Tennessee, filed March 23, 2026) — remain undecided before Judges Clay, Gibbons and Bloomekatz. Three further Michigan appeals involving the same question are pending in the same circuit: Nessel v. KalshiEX, No. 26-1639; QCX LLC v. Nessel, No. 26-1552; and Robinhood Derivatives LLC v. Nessel, No. 26-1542. All three are preliminary-injunction postures, not merits determinations.

Key dates

  • TBD (not yet scheduled) Sixth Circuit decision — argued July 2026, no date set

Timeline

  1. Aug 28, 2026

    Sixth Circuit order granting a motion to withdraw as counsel in the consolidated appeals, entered by Clay, Gibbons and Bloomekatz, JJ. (Nos. 26-3196, 26-5235). Most recent docket activity; no decision.

    Source →
  2. Aug 28, 2026

    Ninth Circuit holds Kalshi has not shown a likelihood that the CEA preempts state gaming regulation as applied to its sports event contracts, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dissolving the injunction (No. 25-7516).

    Source →
  3. Jul 31, 2026

    Sixth Circuit hears consolidated oral argument on appeals from M.D. Tenn. and S.D. Ohio.

    Source →
  4. Apr 6, 2026

    Third Circuit affirms preliminary injunction barring New Jersey enforcement, holding the contracts are likely swaps under the CEA and preemption applies (No. 25-1922, 2-1).

    Source →

In the news →

Sources

Compiled from public filings, court records, league statements, and published reporting. Status reflects the last verified date shown on each entry and may not capture subsequent developments. Commentary and analysis, not legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed through this content.