NFL urges Supreme Court to classify prediction markets as state-regulated gambling

Key points

• The NFL submitted a 'friend of the court' brief supporting New Jersey's petition to the Supreme Court, arguing that prediction markets are gambling rather than financial swaps.
• The league asserts that the CFTC lacks the resources and has failed to implement key safeguards, such as a 21-year minimum age limit and bans on bets susceptible to manipulation.
• The NFL claims that on the first Sunday of the season, football accounted for $1.8 billion in prediction market trading, representing over half of total volume.
• The league requests a Supreme Court ruling before the end of the January football season, warning that delays will increase consumer harm and risk to game integrity.
• Kalshi and Polymarket responded that the CFTC is actively policing their markets and that their ongoing rulemaking addresses the NFL's concerns, while noting the NFL has refused to sign a memorandum of understanding with the CFTC.

Background

This dispute arises from a legal split among federal appeals courts regarding whether sports-related event contracts on platforms like Kalshi are 'swaps' under federal law or 'gambling' under state law. In September 2026, the Sixth and Ninth Circuits ruled that states could regulate these markets, contradicting a Third Circuit decision that favored federal jurisdiction. New Jersey subsequently petitioned the Supreme Court to resolve this conflict, prompting the NFL to intervene in the case.

How outlets are covering it

NBC Sports and CNBC emphasize the NFL's stance that prediction markets are gambling and highlight the league's concerns over game integrity and the lack of age restrictions. CBS News notes the NFL's support for prior court rulings favoring state regulation and includes responses from Kalshi and Polymarket defending federal oversight. Politico frames the NFL's position as a direct challenge to the Trump administration's view that prediction markets should be regulated exclusively by the federal government, contrasting the NFL's cautious approach with other leagues like the NHL and MLB that have partnered with prediction market platforms.

Why it matters

The Supreme Court's decision will determine whether states or the federal government has authority to regulate sports prediction markets. If the NFL prevails, states could impose stricter gambling laws, potentially limiting access to these markets in jurisdictions where sports betting is not yet legalized. This outcome could significantly impact the revenue and operations of prediction market platforms and influence future regulatory frameworks for sports betting in the U.S.

What to watch

The Supreme Court is expected to review the case, with the NFL urging a decision before the end of the pro football season in January. The CFTC and prediction market companies are expected to respond to the NFL's brief, potentially leading to further legal arguments or negotiations. The outcome could set a precedent for how sports-related financial instruments are regulated across the country.