The NFL submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court Thursday, according to the Supreme Court docket for a case in which Mary Jo Flaherty, interim director of the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement, and others are suing Kalshi.
The NFL said in its filing that its concerns about prediction markets and potential risks for game integrity and consumer protection have not been answered by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), according to the CoinBase report.
Kalshi has argued that the CFTC should be the sole regulator of prediction markets, the report said.
In earlier, lower court rulings, one federal court backed Kalshi’s argument, while two others sided with the states, per the report.
We’d love to be your preferred source for news.
Please add us to your preferred sources list so our news, data and interviews show up in your feed. Thanks!
Kalshi spokesperson Elisabeth Diana told CoinBase that Kalshi has tried to work with the NFL and noted that the company has formed partnerships with other sports leagues, including Major League Baseball and the National Hockey League.
“We have consistently tried to engage proactively and constructively with the NFL to collaborate on market integrity with no response,” Diana said in the report.
CNBC reported Thursday that the NFL argued in its amicus brief that sports prediction contracts are effectively gambling that should regulated by the states, not financial swaps that should be regulated exclusively by the CFTC.
The NFL told CNBC: “Neither the CFTC nor the prediction market companies themselves — despite our persistent urging — have banned categories of bets susceptible to manipulation or set a 21 age limit.”
Reuters reported Thursday that the NFL said the CFTC may not have the resources required to supervise this activity.
An NFL spokesperson told Reuters that it was “unclear if the Commission has the resources or staff to adequately regulate sports betting.”
A CFTC spokesperson told PYMNTS in August, after a ruling in a court battle between Nevada and three companies offering prediction markets, that the stage was set for a Supreme Court case.
“A derivative contract structured as a swap is a swap regardless of the underlying subject matter — the only exceptions in statute are onions and movie box office receipts,” CFTC spokesperson Zach Fulton said at the time. “The Ninth Circuit erred today when it invented a new and atextual exception to the CEA [Commodity Exchange Act].”
Add as Preferred Source
