US Lawmakers Urge SCOTUS Review of Prediction Markets Jurisdictional Fight

A coalition of US state lawmakers has asked the Supreme Court to review a jurisdictional dispute involving Kalshi, a prediction markets platform, and New Jersey gaming regulators. The National Council of Legislators from Gaming States (NCLGS) filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold New Jersey's position in the case.

The lawmakers warn that a ruling favoring Kalshi could severely restrict state authority over sports betting-like products offered through prediction markets. They argue that a decision limiting state power would force states to rework their regulatory systems, and other operators could try to change their offerings to obtain similar treatment.

The dispute stems from an appeal after a decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. New Jersey's Attorney General and gaming authorities submitted a petition seeking a writ of certiorari on September 2, asking the Supreme Court to consider whether state authorities or federal agencies have control over prediction market companies.

Kalshi has not filed an official response yet, though the company previously indicated it should not be subject to a patchwork of state regulators. The outcome could determine how prediction market platforms plan for expansion and whether firms prioritize state-by-state compliance strategies or rely more heavily on federal frameworks when structuring products.