Prediction market platform Kalshi has taken the next step in its legal battle against Nevada over its sports-related contracts. The platform has petitioned for an En Banc rehearing of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision favoring Nevada, which held that the state regulator could regulate the sports contracts as gambling.
Kalshi Petitions For En Banc Rehearing In Nevada Case
The prediction market platform filed a petition for an En Banc rehearing before the judges in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The rehearing will include 11 judges, rather than the 3-judge panel that ruled on the case.
As CoinGape reported last week, the 9th Circuit court ruled against Kalshi, with the three judges ruling that Nevada gaming regulators could regulate the platform’s sports contracts like gambling. The court said these sports contracts were not swaps, but sports bets, so the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) likely does not preempt Nevada’s gaming regulations as applied to Kalshi’s sports event contracts.
In its petition for an En Banc rehearing, the platform stated that rehearing is necessary because the panel’s decision creates a circuit split on an important question of federal preemption based on internally inconsistent reasoning that conflicts with the plain text of the CEA.
Kalshi also argued that the 9th Circuit’s decision was contradictory because the court ruled that the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over instruments traded on derivative exchanges, but that states could regulate sports contracts the CFTC approved for trading on those exchanges. “As a result, Kalshi now stands exposed to civil and criminal liability, even though it is abiding by federal law and the mandate of its exclusive federal regulator,” the petition read.
Robinhood Files For Certiorari Petition With Supreme Court
Brokerage platform Robinhood has filed a certiorari petition with the Supreme Court over the 9th Circuit’s decision. It is worth noting that the court had rejected Kalshi, Crypto.com, and Robinhood’s request for injunctive relief against the Nevada Gaming Control Board.
Kalshi could have appealed to the Supreme Court but instead sought an En Banc rehearing. Robinhood joins New Jersey, which had earlier filed a certiorari petition with the Supreme Court, questioning whether states have jurisdiction over sports prediction markets.
Unlike the 9th Circuit, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Kalshi that the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over sports prediction markets because they are swaps. This has created the circuit split that Kalshi cited in its En Banc petition.
Legal expert Daniel Wallach noted that Kalshi and Robinhood’s respective filings are likely a tag-team strategy. He noted that Kalshi may have petitioned for En Banc rehearing to deter enforcement actions by states in the 9th Circuit. At the same time, Robinhood pushes for expedited treatment in the Supreme Court and consolidation of its petition with New Jersey’s.
BREAKING: Robinhood has filed a cert petition with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking review of the Ninth Circuit decision on sports prediction markets. Follows right on the heels of Kalshi’s petition for rehearing en banc, a likely tag-team strategy that I outlined yesterday. https://t.co/VgobSg2Hmd
— Daniel Wallach (@WALLACHLEGAL) September 9, 2026
Be the first to comment