Lede
A Tennessee federal judge has issued a temporary stay preventing state regulators from proceeding with enforcement actions against the prediction market platform Kalshi. This decision follows a lawsuit filed by the company after it was ordered by state authorities to immediately halt the offering of sports event contracts within the jurisdiction. Judge Aleta Trauger presided over the matter and supported the motion filed by Kalshi for a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order. This legal maneuver effectively pauses the state’s efforts to regulate the platform while the broader legal challenge continues to move through the court system.
The Tennessee Sports Wagering Council had previously initiated a regulatory crackdown by sending cease-and-desist letters to several prominent platforms, including Kalshi, Polymarket, and Crypto.com. These letters mandated that the companies stop providing sports-related event contracts to residents of the state. The council’s directives included a requirement to void existing contracts and issue full refunds to all users based in Tennessee. However, the recent judicial intervention ensures that any state-level action against Kalshi remains frozen for the time being. The court’s order provides a temporary reprieve for the platform as it seeks to defend its operations against state-level oversight. The temporary restraining order also applies to the state’s attorney general, Jonathan Skrmetti, alongside the Sports Wagering Council. This legal development highlights the ongoing tension between state gambling regulators and platforms that offer event-based contracts. By supporting the preliminary injunction, the court has acknowledged the need to maintain the status quo while the legal authority of the state is debated.
Context
The conflict began when the Tennessee Sports Wagering Council issued formal cease-and-desist orders to Kalshi and other major industry participants, such as Polymarket and Crypto.com. These regulatory notices alleged that the platforms were offering sports wagering products without the necessary state-issued licenses. In addition to the demand to stop offering sports event contracts, the regulators imposed a strict deadline for the companies to exit the local market. Specifically, the council ordered the entities to refund all Tennessee-based users by Jan. 31. The financial stakes of the enforcement action are considerable, as the state threatened to impose fines of up to $25,000 for every offense committed by the platforms.
In response to these demands, Kalshi initiated litigation against several key state figures and entities. The lawsuit names the Tennessee Sports Wagering Council as a defendant, along with its chair, William Orgen, and the executive director, Mary Beth Thomas. Furthermore, the state attorney general, Jonathan Skrmetti, is included in the legal action. Kalshi’s primary argument in its defense centers on its status as a federally designated derivatives exchange. The company maintains that its operations fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. By asserting federal oversight, Kalshi argues that the state of Tennessee is overstepping its legal boundaries and intruding upon a regulatory framework established by the federal government for the oversight of designated contract markets. The company contends that this federal framework, established by Congress, is the sole authority for regulating derivatives on designated exchanges.
Impact
The judicial decision in Tennessee reflects a broader legal pattern as Kalshi challenges state regulators across multiple jurisdictions. The platform has consistently argued that because it is a regulated exchange under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, state-level gambling or wagering laws should not apply to its offerings. This jurisdictional dispute has led to varying outcomes in different regions of the United States. For instance, courts in Nevada and New Jersey have previously sided with Kalshi, issuing blocks that prevent state regulators from taking enforcement actions while legal proceedings are ongoing. These victories in Nevada and New Jersey have provided a precedent for the platform’s strategy of seeking judicial relief against state-level cease-and-desist orders.
However, the legal environment is not universally favorable for the prediction market platform. In Maryland, a judge denied a similar request from Kalshi for a temporary block on state regulatory actions. This discrepancy illustrates the complex and evolving nature of how different state courts interpret the intersection of federal derivatives law and state wagering statutes. The Tennessee ruling aligns with the outcomes seen in Nevada and New Jersey, providing the company with a temporary shield as it argues its case. The outcome of these collective legal battles could significantly influence how prediction markets are regulated nationwide. If Kalshi’s arguments regarding exclusive federal jurisdiction are upheld, it could limit the ability of state regulators to intervene in the operations of CFTC-regulated event contract markets. Conversely, the denial in Maryland suggests that some judicial authorities still see a role for state-level oversight in these specific types of financial products.
Outlook
The immediate future of the case in Tennessee hinges on an upcoming judicial proceeding. The court has scheduled a preliminary injunction hearing for Jan. 26, which will determine whether the temporary stay against state regulators will be extended or made more permanent while the lawsuit is fully litigated. Until this hearing takes place, the state’s enforcement actions against Kalshi are effectively frozen. This pause is critical for the platform, as it was originally facing a Jan. 31 deadline to refund all users within the state and cease its operations. The temporary restraining order allows Kalshi to maintain its current operations in Tennessee without the immediate threat of the $25,000-per-offense fines that were previously threatened by the Tennessee Sports Wagering Council.
The Jan. 26 hearing will likely focus on the merits of Kalshi’s claim regarding the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. If the court continues to find that the company is likely to succeed on these merits, the platform may secure a long-term injunction that prevents Tennessee from enforcing its sports wagering laws against the exchange. Conversely, if the court later sides with the state’s regulators, Kalshi could be forced to comply with the original cease-and-desist demands, including the mandatory refunding of users by the Jan. 31 target date and the potential payment of significant penalties. For now, the platform continues to operate under the protection of the federal court. This period allows the legal system to weigh the tension between state regulatory power and federal oversight of derivatives markets, with the upcoming hearing serving as a pivotal moment for the platform’s ability to operate in Tennessee.
About the Author
