Core Dispute: Definition Battle and the Clash Between Federal Authority and State Rights

The dispute between Kalshi and the Nevada state government over regulatory authority is a landmark case highlighting the current conflict between the U.S. federal government and state governments over jurisdiction. Kalshi argues that what it provides are “event contracts” regulated by the CFTC, which fall under financial derivatives; meanwhile, Nevada has determined that this is essentially sports betting that requires a gambling license, and therefore constitutes illegal operation.

Timeline: Injunctions Intensify One Layer After Another

· March 2025: The Nevada Gaming Control Board issues its first cease-and-desist order. Kalshi immediately sues the state government and successfully obtains a preliminary injunction, allowing it to continue operating.
· November 2025: Federal Judge Andrew Gordon reverses the ruling, finding that Kalshi’s interpretation of CFTC exclusive jurisdiction “would upend decades of federalism in gambling regulation.”
· March–April 2026: State judges issue consecutive temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions, completely banning Kalshi from operating within the state. The rationale is very straightforward: whether it’s betting with Caesars or buying contracts on Kalshi, “the act itself is indistinguishable.”

Core Legal Conflict

Kalshi contends that the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction, and federal law takes precedence over state gambling laws. But the state government cites a 2018 Supreme Court precedent, emphasizing that gambling regulation authority belongs to the states; if Kalshi prevails, the CFTC would become a “nationwide gambling regulator,” and the sovereignty of each state would be severely undermined.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held a joint hearing for the cases of Kalshi, Crypto com, and Robinhood. The three judges were generally skeptical of Kalshi, and some commentary described the hearing’s progress as “the most understated characterization of the year.” This case will very likely ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. Notably, the CFTC chair nominee is a member of the Kalshi board, and the related conflict-of-interest concerns have drawn the attention of members of Congress—this variable may add new uncertainty to the case’s outcome.#kalshi与内华达州的监管权争议