KalshiEX LLC

Nevada authorities consider certain Kalshi sports contracts to be wagering that requires a state gaming license. After conflicting interim orders, the Ninth Circuit on August 28, 2026 declined to bar state regulation. This dispute is separate from Utah’s criminal case.

State of the evidence

The proceeding is documented by cited sources; liability on the merits is not presumed.

Legal status — source text

Kalshi’s preliminary protection was lifted on appeal; related litigation had not reached a final resolution.

Attribution

Allegedly offering sports-event contracts without the Nevada gaming license authorities require.

The Massachusetts attorney general sued Kalshi over contracts treated by the state as unlicensed sports wagering. A state court granted preliminary injunctive relief on January 20, 2026 and denied a motion to dismiss. Subsequent requests to stay the order require a fresh docket check.

State of the evidence

The proceeding is documented by cited sources; liability on the merits is not presumed.

Legal status — source text

Civil or administrative proceedings; no criminal conviction established.

Attribution

Allegedly offering sports contracts that Massachusetts says require a state license.

The Third Circuit ruled at this stage that New Jersey regulators could not apply state gambling laws to the sports contracts at issue. This pro-Kalshi ruling contrasts with later decisions in other circuits and does not resolve cases elsewhere.

State of the evidence

The proceeding is documented by cited sources; liability on the merits is not presumed.

Legal status — source text

Civil or administrative proceedings; no criminal conviction established.

Attribution

Dispute over federal preemption of New Jersey gambling regulations.

The Sixth Circuit affirmed Ohio’s refusal of interim relief and vacated a preliminary injunction Kalshi had obtained against Tennessee officials. The court rejected Kalshi’s assertion of exclusive CFTC jurisdiction over the sports contracts at issue. The disputes were remanded for further proceedings.

State of the evidence

The proceeding is documented by cited sources; liability on the merits is not presumed.

Legal status — source text

Civil or administrative proceedings; no criminal conviction established.

Attribution

Sports-event contracts treated as gambling by regulators in Ohio and Tennessee.

Utah’s attorney general filed a civil action alleging Kalshi offered online wagers contrary to state law and sought injunctive relief. The civil case is distinct from criminal charges filed on October 28.

State of the evidence

The proceeding is documented by cited sources; liability on the merits is not presumed.

Legal status — source text

Civil or administrative proceedings; no criminal conviction established.

Attribution

Offering event contracts Utah authorities treat as unlawful gambling.

Utah prosecutors filed 14 criminal counts against Kalshi and its two co-founders, alleging unlawful online gambling promotion and a pattern of unlawful activity. The case describes trades made by a state investigator. No guilty verdict was identified by the research date.

State of the evidence

Filed criminal charges documented; allegations remain to be tried.

Legal status — source text

Utah criminal charges filed October 28; no verdict established as of November 11.

Attribution

Fourteen criminal counts alleging promotion of illegal gambling and related activity.

Reuters and Business Insider reported that the CFTC warned Kalshi of possible charges after examining how it notified the agency about proposed contracts. The issue concerns the exchange’s product self-certification process. No formal federal charge was confirmed as of November 11.

State of the evidence

Reported investigation; allegations have not been adjudicated.

Legal status — source text

Reported inquiry and warning; no new federal charge confirmed.

Attribution

Alleged failures to notify the federal regulator properly about new event contracts.

The CFTC had barred contracts tied to control of the US Congress. Kalshi challenged the ban; a federal district court vacated it in September 2024, and an appellate court declined to stay that ruling in October. The dispute concerned statutory interpretation of derivatives rules.

State of the evidence

The proceeding is documented by cited sources; liability on the merits is not presumed.

Legal status — source text

The CFTC’s requested appellate stay was denied; the rulings then favored Kalshi.

Attribution

Regulatory dispute over contracts tied to US election outcomes.