The National Football League has formally asked the United States Supreme Court to subject event prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket to state-level gambling regulations, citing mounting concerns over match integrity and the risk of game manipulation. In an amicus brief filed in support of New Jersey regulatory authorities, the league argued that platforms operating outside traditional sports betting frameworks leave critical blind spots that threaten the fairness of professional football.
New Jersey Legal Battle Draws Supreme Court Amicus Brief
The legal confrontation centers on a dispute between New Jersey regulators and Kalshi, a financial exchange that lists event-based contracts. While traditional sportsbooks must adhere to strict state-level sports betting statutes, prediction markets are federally supervised by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission as designated contract markets, functioning similarly to financial exchanges. Approximately 20 states have argued in court that these prediction platforms should face the same licensing requirements and restrictions as standard sportsbooks. By throwing its weight behind New Jersey’s bid to take the case to the nation’s highest court, the league seeks to establish state oversight over a market where it currently holds no regulatory authority.
Ticker Data Highlights Heavy Football Volume on Kalshi
Economic stakes underpin the league’s urgent push for tighter supervision. Tracking data from Ticker Tracker revealed that during a recent Sunday slate of games, NFL-related contracts accounted for 65.8 percent of Kalshi’s total sports trading volume. This concentration makes professional football the primary volume driver for the platform. Despite generating the vast majority of the exchange’s sports activity, the league receives no revenue share and holds no formal say in how those markets operate.
Specific Prop Bets and On-Field Risks Cited by the League
In its filing, the league identified several categories of contracts that expose the sport to potential abuse. Particularly vulnerable are micro-events centered on individual athletes, such as whether a specific kicker will successfully convert a field goal, as well as predictable occurrences like the outcome of a game’s first play. The league also called for an outright ban on markets involving game officials and wagers tied to what it categorizes as fundamentally offensive outcomes, including player injuries. Although traditional sportsbooks offer various prop bets, the league prohibits certain wagers—such as whether a quarterback’s opening pass will be incomplete—to safeguard game integrity. The league contends that prediction platforms lack these vital guardrails and criticized the Commodity Futures Trading Commission for failing to implement sufficient oversight or adopt common-sense preventative measures.
Kalshi and Federal Regulators Defend Exchange Oversight
Representatives for Kalshi disputed the league’s characterization, stating that the company had repeatedly reached out to establish proactive dialogues regarding market integrity, only to receive no response. Kalshi maintained that sports-related contracts are actively monitored across nearly every American commodity exchange and that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission already addresses many of the league’s concerns during ongoing rule-making proceedings. Brooke Nethercott, director of public affairs for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, added that the federal agency has maintained an active dialogue with the league since day one. Nethercott noted that the federal regulator regrets the league’s decision to reject a proposed memorandum of understanding that would have formalized information sharing and cooperation to strengthen market resilience.
Widespread State Backing and Ongoing Industry Coordination
The league’s filing joins a broad coalition of opponents challenging the current regulatory status of prediction exchanges. Thirty-nine states submitted an amicus brief backing New Jersey’s position, while several Native American tribal nations filed separate documents asking the Supreme Court to hear the case. This legal filing follows a previous joint letter sent by the NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB, MLS, and their respective players associations to state regulators, demanding lifetime bans for bettors who harass or threaten athletes and staff. Under current legal frameworks, however, those protective bans do not automatically apply to federally regulated prediction markets.
Keep reading
