Crypto.com and Robinhood Petitions Ask Supreme Court to Preempt State Rules on Sports-Event Contracts

Robinhood and Crypto.com confirmed Friday that they separately filed petitions with the Supreme Court requesting review of their Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals losses against Nevada. The filings ask the Court to decide whether the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state regulation of sports-event contracts traded on a CFTC-registered designated contract market. According to reporting by SBC Americas, the questions closely track those posed by New Jersey from Kalshi‘s Third Circuit win, increasing the chance the cases could be considered together.

“The Supreme Court now has the opportunity to provide clarity on the regulation of prediction markets, which we believe rightly sits with the CFTC,” a Robinhood spokesperson wrote. “It’s our position that the Court should review these cases collectively as we seek to ensure every eligible customer has access to these markets as a tool to aggregate dispersed information, hedge risk, and speculate on their beliefs about future events.”

“Today’s petition to the Supreme Court is an important step toward obtaining clarity on who gets to regulate federally registered prediction markets. We have faith in the judicial process and are confident the Court will find that these important financial instruments are subject to exclusive CFTC oversight,” a Crypto.com spokesperson told SBC Americas. “We have always prioritized compliance with our regulatory obligations, and are proud that our regulator, the CFTC, supports the industry’s effort to obtain clarity through the judicial process. We welcome the Court’s review.”

Core Arguments on Swaps and Congressional Intent

The petitions turn on the definition of swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. Crypto.com contends sports-event contracts qualify as swaps because their payout depends on the occurrence of a sporting outcome associated with potential economic consequences, including the billions of dollars of economic activity surrounding sports entertainment.

The filing extends the hedging logic to municipalities exposed to risks from fan unrest and safety costs, as well as vendors managing supply based on game outcomes. It leans on the Third Circuit‘s approach and argues that Congress explicitly referenced gaming in the statute’s special rule for CFTC bans, confirming it contemplated the interaction between swaps and gambling.

Limits of the Long-Shot Rehearing and Next Steps

Kalshi has filed for an en banc rehearing at the Ninth Circuit, a move that rarely succeeds but temporarily delays enforcement of state gambling laws against the platforms. The petitions arrive amid a CFTC proposal to revamp event contract rules that could either clarify or complicate the special gaming provision.

A favorable Supreme Court decision would place oversight exclusively with the CFTC, removing state-by-state barriers for compliant platforms. Operators face continued uncertainty until the Court acts, with the circuit split offering a concrete basis for review. The ruling will set the operational boundaries for sports-linked prediction markets nationwide.

Reporting: SBC Americas

Generated by SCCG’s automated editorial system from published source reporting. SCCG Management holds editorial responsibility.