A Nevada court has extended a ban preventing Kalshi from offering its event-contract products to state residents while litigation proceeds. At a hearing in Carson City, District Judge Jason Woodbury granted a preliminary injunction that bars Kalshi from allowing Nevada residents to trade contracts tied to sports, elections, entertainment and similar outcomes unless the firm holds a Nevada gaming license.
The order prolongs a temporary restraining order first issued on March 20 and will remain in effect through April 17 as the court considers longer-term relief. The injunction followed a request from the Nevada Gaming Control Board to stop Kalshi’s activity in the state market.
Kalshi has argued its contracts are financial “swaps” regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), asserting federal law places such products under CFTC jurisdiction. The Nevada court rejected that defense. Woodbury said purchasing a contract tied to a game outcome is essentially the same as placing a sportsbook wager: “No matter how you slice it, that conduct is indistinguishable.”
The ruling is the first instance of a state obtaining an active, court-enforced ban against Kalshi, giving Nevada an early legal victory as other states scrutinize prediction-market offerings linked to sports and other events. The case underscores a broader tension between state gambling statutes and federal claims of CFTC oversight over prediction markets.
The dispute is unfolding as the CFTC defends its asserted regulatory role. CFTC Chairman Michael Selig has said the agency is prepared to litigate to protect its jurisdiction and has described prediction markets as “truth machines,” arguing that markets where participants risk money on outcomes can provide clearer signals about future events than polls.
State-level action elsewhere reflects similar concerns. Utah lawmakers recently passed a bill classifying proposition-style in-game bets as gambling, seeking to block comparable offerings on platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket.
For now, Nevada’s injunction prevents Kalshi from serving residents without a gaming license while the court reviews next steps. The case will test the boundaries between state gambling enforcement and federal oversight claims for event-based contracts.