Nevada Opposes Kalshi Delay in Ninth Circuit Rehearing Citing Statutory Basis Over Pending CFTC Rules
Nevada has opposed Kalshi’s request to delay a Ninth Circuit rehearing, arguing that the CFTC’s anticipated change would not alter the court’s statutory analysis under the Commodity Exchange Act. The CFTC has submitted two proposed rules to the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. The judge ordered the parties to submit a proposed injunction by October 29.
SCCG Take — Courts are prioritizing statutory text over anticipated rulemaking, leaving operators exposed to varied state enforcement. Federal preemption remains a narrow shield at best.
Nevada has opposed Kalshi’s request to delay a Ninth Circuit rehearing, maintaining that upcoming CFTC revisions will not alter the court’s conclusion on the platform’s sports-event contracts. The state argues the ruling rests on the Commodity Exchange Act itself rather than the specific regulation under review. This position tests the weight of future federal rules against established judicial readings of federal preemption limits, according to reporting by Casino Beats.
Nevada’s Position on the Rehearing Petition
In a response to Kalshi’s September 25 letter, the state through lawyer Nicole Saharsky of Mayer Brown stated that the court already knew of the CFTC’s plan to revise Section 40.11 when it decided the case. Nevada contends the anticipated change within the next two months does not justify a hold because the Ninth Circuit’s analysis relied on the statute’s text, context and purposes. The filing characterizes Kalshi’s request as an effort to prolong operations while the dispute continues unresolved.
Intersecting Rulings and the Illinois Front
The CFTC has submitted two proposed rules for White House review. One would define a swap to include event contracts while the other would exclude casino-style gambling products. This rulemaking follows an August three-judge Ninth Circuit panel decision that the Commodity Exchange Act likely does not preempt state gaming law. Parallel outcomes appear in Blue Lake Rancheria v. Kalshi, a Ninth Circuit ruling that the Act does not authorize sports betting on tribal land, and Sixth Circuit decisions permitting Ohio and Tennessee to enforce their sports-gambling laws against Kalshi.
A separate Illinois matter adds a live front. A federal judge granted preliminary-injunction requests in part involving Kalshi, Coinbase and the CFTC. Parties must submit a proposed injunction by October 29. The Illinois Gaming Board considers sports-event contracts illegal untaxed gambling. The state legislature imposed a transaction tax of 1.75% to 3.5% on such contracts while challenges to wagering fees remain unresolved. These matters leave the precise boundaries between federal oversight and state gambling regulation unsettled.
Reporting: Casino Beats
Generated by SCCG’s automated editorial system from published source reporting. SCCG Management holds editorial responsibility.
Gaming, betting and prediction markets — the desk’s read, every weekday.
Subscribe →