Share 
This image was created entirely by AI with guidance from our editorial team.
The Second Circuit denied Kalshi’s requests for injunctions in New York and Connecticut on Nov. 3, 2026, leaving both states free to pursue enforcement while appeals continue, according to MLQ.ai.
The decisions add to the prediction-market operator’s legal setbacks in a widening dispute over whether sports-event contracts fall under federal commodities regulation or state gambling laws. No West Virginia-specific enforcement action or market change was reported.
Nevada rehearing denial leaves Kalshi exposed to enforcement
On Nov. 4, the Ninth Circuit denied Kalshi’s requests for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc in its Nevada case. That leaves the company without appellate protection against Nevada enforcement and gives it 90 days to seek Supreme Court review.
The Ninth Circuit held that Kalshi had not shown the Commodity Exchange Act preempted Nevada’s gaming regulations as applied to its sports contracts. Nevada requires licenses for accepting compensation for wagers on sporting or other events.
Other states have also secured restrictions. Michigan’s attorney general obtained a temporary restraining order halting Kalshi’s internet sports betting operation and advertising while that case continues. Massachusetts obtained a preliminary injunction on Jan. 20, 2026, barring sports wagers and related event contracts from Massachusetts customers unless Kalshi complies with state sports-gaming requirements, including licensing.
Federal courts split over sports-event contracts
Kalshi operates a designated contract market registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. It argues that its yes-or-no contracts, including contracts on which team will win a game or tournament, are swaps governed by the Commodity Exchange Act. States contend the products are wagers subject to their gambling laws.
The Third Circuit reached a different preliminary conclusion in April, affirming an injunction preventing New Jersey from applying its gambling laws to Kalshi’s sports contracts. The Sixth Circuit later ruled for Ohio and Tennessee and noted the opposing results reached by the Third and Ninth circuits on substantially the same federal-preemption question.
The CFTC has sued several states, asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction over event contracts traded on designated contract markets. In October, it proposed a rule expressly including contracts based on sports, politics, culture and weather within the definition of swaps.
More from playwv.com – CFTC settlement bars former White House worker from prediction markets after Kalshi profits – New York sues Kalshi, calls prediction market platform an illegal gambling operation – Kalshi Loses Ninth Circuit Rehearing Bid in Nevada Case
—
Source: As reported by MLQ.ai.
