The National Football League has largely aligned itself with New Jersey officials in their effort to get the US Supreme Court to hear a case over sports betting through prediction market platforms, including Kalshi.
In an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court on Wednesday, the NFL urged the justices to grant a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport and interim gaming enforcement director Mary Jo Flaherty. New Jersey officials had asked the court to take up their case against Kalshi, a move that could help settle whether prediction market companies fall under state authority or federal oversight.
The league backed several of New Jersey’s arguments. Among them: whether sports-event contracts on prediction market platforms can be labeled as “swaps,” and whether the case should be reviewed to “preserve game integrity” and “protect customers.”
The NFL cited data showing that on the first Sunday of the football season, more than half of all prediction market trading volume was tied to the league. The figure was about $1.8 billion out of $3.3 billion.
According to the NFL, many sports-event contracts listed on Kalshi and other platforms are “highly susceptible to manipulation” or are “otherwise inherently objectionable.”
The brief said: “These bets, in the NFL’s view, pose the greatest threats to game integrity, because many can be manipulated by a single person, especially if known in advance—for instance, a player can alter his performance, a coach can change his team’s lineup, or an official can make (or not make) certain calls.”
The NFL also argued that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has not put in place what it called “sensible safeguards” for these event contracts. It said the question of federalizing sports betting regulation, instead of leaving it to individual states, is a “major question” that the Supreme Court should examine.
As of Thursday, the Supreme Court had not announced whether it would review the case. Kalshi was granted more time to respond to New Jersey’s filing, giving the company until Nov. 9 to address questions tied to jurisdiction, manipulable event contracts and consumer protection.
States ask the court to clarify who regulates prediction markets
Also on Wednesday, 39 US states and the District of Columbia filed a separate amicus brief supporting New Jersey. That filing said the clash between the CFTC and state authorities over prediction markets had turned into a “national turf war” and could not be resolved without an answer from the Supreme Court.
The brief said: “Waiting too long to address this issue will permit the federal-state regulatory dispute to escalate. The ongoing power struggle between the States and the CFTC highlights the unpredictability about what law applies—and to whom. Whether in this case, or in one of the many more cases sure to come, this Court should step in, resolve the circuit split, provide guidance to lower courts, clarify the CFTC’s authority, and provide the badly needed answer to the Question Presented.”
After New Jersey’s September filing, Kalshi spokesperson Dani Lever told Cointelegraph that the company could not be “regulated by 50 different regulators.”
It remains unclear whether the justices will take up the prediction markets issue. New Jersey officials were the first to ask the high court to review the Kalshi case, but they are not alone. Other state-level actions against prediction market companies could also move into the appeals process.