NFL Urges Supreme Court to Rule Kalshi's Sports Contracts Are Gambling, Not Swaps

Published October 9, 2026, 03:30 UTC. The NFL filed its amicus brief on Oct. 8, 2026.

The National Football League filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday, October 8, urging the justices to hear New Jersey's challenge to prediction market Kalshi and to treat its sports event contracts as gambling governed by state law, not as federally regulated swaps, according to reports from CNBC, the New York Post and The Block. The filing backs a petition for a writ of certiorari from New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport and gaming enforcement interim director Mary Jo Flaherty in Flaherty v. KalshiEX, LLC (No. 26-299), a case that could decide whether prediction markets offer sports wagers nationwide under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission or face state gambling rules.

The $1.8 billion Sunday the NFL cited to the justices

The league's core evidence for the case's scale was a single game day. On the first Sunday of the football season, more than half of all prediction-markets trading volume, about $1.8 billion of $3.3 billion, related to the NFL, according to the amicus brief as reported by Cointelegraph and NBC Sports. The NFL said sporting-event contracts on Kalshi and other platforms were "highly susceptible to manipulation" or otherwise inherently objectionable. These contracts, in the league's view, pose the greatest threats to game integrity because many can be manipulated by a single person if known in advance: 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 brief said.

Gambling, not swaps: the league's legal case

The NFL argued that contracts offered by Kalshi and other prediction markets are not financial swaps subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, The Block reported. The league borrowed reasoning from the Sixth and Ninth Circuits: swaps traditionally hedge pre-existing financial risk, while sports contracts expose consumers to the outcome of an event in which they have no underlying financial interest. The brief also attacked the CFTC's oversight of the space, arguing the agency has taken a "laissez-faire approach" to safeguards and lacks adequate staff, with only 543 employees compared with the hundreds of staff covering gambling in each state, Reason reported. The NFL further objected that Kalshi accepts customers as young as 18 while traditional sportsbooks generally require bettors to be at least 21, and said neither the CFTC nor the platforms had banned categories of bets susceptible to manipulation despite its urging, according to CNBC's reporting.

What Kalshi says back

Kalshi has maintained that its event contracts are financial derivatives falling under the exclusive oversight of the CFTC and cannot be regulated by 50 different regulators, a position spokesperson Dani Lever stated after New Jersey's September filing, Cointelegraph reported. Responding to the NFL's brief, Kalshi spokeswoman Elisabeth Diana told NBC Sports that market integrity is the company's top priority, pointing to partnerships with the NHL and Major League Baseball as evidence. "Contrary to the NFL's statements, the CFTC is actively policing sports-related markets, which are now listed on nearly every U.S. commodities exchange," Diana said, adding that the CFTC's ongoing rulemaking addresses many of the league's concerns and sits on top of federal enforcement that protects trillions of dollars of U.S. market transactions.

39 states join New Jersey's push

On Wednesday, 39 U.S. states and the District of Columbia filed their own amicus brief supporting New Jersey's position, calling the conflict between the CFTC and state authorities a "national turf war" that only the Supreme Court can resolve, Cointelegraph reported. "Waiting too long to address this issue will permit the federal-state regulatory dispute to escalate," the states' filing said. The dispute follows conflicting appeals court decisions: the Third Circuit ruled the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction, blocking New Jersey from enforcing its gaming laws against Kalshi, while other circuits have reached different conclusions. Kalshi has been granted an extension to respond to New Jersey's petition, giving the company until November 9 to address jurisdiction, manipulable event contracts and consumer protection, Cointelegraph reported. As of Thursday, the Supreme Court had not announced whether it would grant review.

This article is news reporting and is not investment advice.

Sources

• NFL amicus brief in Flaherty v. KalshiEX, LLC (No. 26-299), U.S. Supreme Court (filed Oct. 8, 2026; referenced via supreme court docket), primary source
• Cointelegraph, NFL Joins Prediction Markets Fight in Filing with US Supreme Court (Oct. 8, 2026), secondary source
• New York Post, NFL urges Supreme Court to rule prediction markets are gambling apps (Oct. 8, 2026), secondary source
• The Block, NFL tells Supreme Court prediction market sports contracts are gambling, not swaps (Oct. 8, 2026), secondary source
• NBC Sports Bay Area, NFL urges Supreme Court to rule on regulating prediction markets (Oct. 8, 2026), secondary source
• Reason, The NFL Chooses States, Not the CFTC, in Fight Over Prediction Market Regulation (Oct. 8, 2026), secondary source