Nevada is pushing back on Kalshi’s attempt to wait for new federal rules before the Ninth Circuit considers its rehearing petition. The state says the coming Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) changes may not touch the legal reasoning behind the court’s ruling, leaving prediction-market operators with the same state-regulation problem even after the rulebook changes.

That distinction matters if you follow esports event markets: a federal regulator changing how contracts are classified does not automatically mean a court will abandon its reading of the law. Nevada’s argument, reported by CasinoBeats, is that the Ninth Circuit’s analysis rests on the Commodity Exchange Act itself, not just the current wording of one CFTC regulation. The dispute is part of the broader CFTC rulemaking debate over prediction markets.

In a September 25 letter, Kalshi asked the court to rehear its case en banc, meaning before all eligible judges, or to hold the petition until the CFTC publishes a revised version of Section 40.11. The company pointed to the agency’s stated intention to revise the regulation within the next two months. Nevada says that schedule is not a reason to put the court proceedings on ice.

Nevada’s lawyer, Nicole Saharsky of Mayer Brown, argued in the filing that the court already knew the CFTC intended to revise the provision when it issued its decision. The state’s point is narrower than saying the agency’s work is irrelevant: a planned revision signals when a change might arrive, but does not establish that the change will alter the court’s reasoning.

Source link