Share 
Bonus TL;DR
- The NFL has officially joined the massive legal offensive against U.S. prediction markets, filing an amicus brief at the Supreme Court to back state gaming regulators in their jurisdictional war against the federal government over the oversight of platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket.
- Arguing that the current federal commodities framework is dangerously inadequate, the league warned that unchecked sports event contracts threaten game integrity by allowing underage wagering and bets tied to easily manipulated single-player outcomes. The NFL’s filing was heavily bolstered by additional briefs from former CFTC Chair Gary Gensler and former Senator Chris Dodd, both of whom forcefully argued that Congress never intended to use financial reform laws to strip states and tribal authorities of their traditional sovereign control over sports betting.
The NFL has filed a brief at the U.S. Supreme Court backing states and tribal gaming regulators in the fight over whether sports-related prediction markets should be policed by federal commodities regulators or by local gambling authorities.
The filing matters because the dispute could shape how platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket are overseen in the U.S., including whether sports event contracts can continue operating under a federal regulatory framework that leagues and state regulators say is too light.
The league argued that federally regulated prediction markets “pose real challenges to game integrity and consumer protection” and said the current system does not impose the same controls used by state gaming regulators. In its filing, the NFL said federal oversight has allowed wagering tied to outcomes that can be influenced by a single player and has also allowed people younger than 21 to bet.
The NFL also urged the court to act quickly, saying, “Billions of dollars will be bet on NFL games through prediction markets each season, and any delay from the court will result in increasing consumer harm and risk to game integrity.“
NFL, former regulators line up behind states and tribes
The NFL’s brief adds a major sports league to the coalition supporting state and tribal authority in the case. According to the source report, former CFTC chair Gary Gensler also filed a brief arguing that Congress did not hand sports-betting jurisdiction from the states to the federal commodities regulator.
Gensler wrote that “Congress did not transfer jurisdiction over sports betting from the states to the CFTC” and said the Dodd-Frank changes to the Commodity Exchange Act were aimed at the financial crisis, not at displacing state and tribal gaming regulation.
Former Senator Chris Dodd filed a separate brief making a similar argument. He said Congress “did not set out to authorize nationwide sports betting through derivatives markets or displace decades of state and tribal primacy over gaming regulation.”
The case is before the Supreme Court under docket 26-299.
Kalshi and the CFTC dispute the NFL’s account
Kalshi said it had tried to work with the league before the filing. Spokesperson Elisabeth Diana said, “We have consistently tried to engage proactively and constructively with the NFL to collaborate on market integrity with no response.”
The CFTC also pushed back on the NFL’s criticism. The agency said it had been in contact with the league from the start, stating, “Since day 1, the CFTC has engaged with the NFL regarding the agency’s rulemaking agenda and policy priorities.“
The agency said it was “unfortunate” that the NFL did not secure an arrangement that “would’ve provided the league the ability to better discuss, cooperate, and exchange information with us to promote the integrity and resilience of prediction markets.”
What happens next is whether the Supreme Court agrees to act, and if so, how it addresses the underlying jurisdiction fight over sports-related prediction markets and the balance between federal oversight and state and tribal gaming regulation.
Source: As reported by Jesse Hamilton, Helene Braun.
