The plot thickens in the ongoing saga over where prediction markets actually belong. A group called the National Council of Legislators from Gaming States (NCLGS) just filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, and they are highkey pushing for the justices to take up the case between New Jersey and the prediction platform Kalshi.
The fight for control
Right now, there is a major tug-of-war happening over who gets to hold the leash on these platforms: federal agencies or individual states. New Jersey’s Attorney General and gaming authorities filed a petition on Sept. 2 asking the Supreme Court to step in and decide once and for all if state regulators or federal entities (like the CFTC) hold the cards.
The NCLGS is siding with New Jersey, arguing that if Kalshi gets a W here, it could essentially render states powerless to regulate sports betting. Their main concern is that if prediction markets aren't subject to local rules, other major players—like traditional casinos—will pivot their business models to dodge state regulations, creating a total mess for existing gaming laws.
Why it matters
As always, keep in mind that this is not financial advice, but the stakes here are massive for the future of on-chain and prediction-based betting. Kalshi has until Nov. 9 to file their official response, but they’ve previously argued that they simply can’t be expected to comply with 50 different state regulators. If the Supreme Court takes this, it could bring much-needed clarity—or chaos—to the entire industry. Real talk: we are watching this one closely to see if the feds or the states end up holding the bag.
