As of January 22, 2026, the United States is witnessing a historic constitutional collision between federal financial oversight and century-old state police powers. At the center of this storm is KalshiEX LLC, the first federally regulated exchange for "event contracts," which is currently locked in a multi-front legal war with state gaming regulators in Nevada, New Jersey, and Maryland. These cases, which have now migrated to the U.S. appellate courts, are not just about whether Americans can bet on the weather or elections; they are about the "Federal Preemption" doctrine and whether the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has the exclusive right to define what constitutes a financial derivative.
In the prediction markets themselves, traders are placing millions of dollars on the outcome of these very lawsuits. On platforms like Polymarket and ForecastEx, a "Circuit Split" is already being priced in. While the market for the Third Circuit (New Jersey) case shows a staggering 81% probability of a Kalshi victory, the outlook in the Ninth Circuit (Nevada) remains significantly more bearish following a surprise reversal by a district judge last November. The divergence in these markets suggests that the industry is bracing for a Supreme Court showdown that could redefine the legality of prediction markets for a generation.
The Market: What’s Being Predicted
The "Legal Recognition" markets have become some of the most liquid and closely watched contracts in the early months of 2026. These are not markets about political outcomes or sports scores, but "meta-markets" on the judicial system itself. Traders are currently focusing on three primary judicial battlegrounds:
- The Third Circuit (New Jersey): Currently trading at 81% "Yes" for a Kalshi win. This contract tracks whether the Third Circuit Court of Appeals will uphold a lower court’s ruling that the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) preempts New Jersey state law.
- The Ninth Circuit (Nevada): Trading at a more volatile 42% probability. This market has seen heavy "No" activity after U.S. District Judge Andrew Gordon dissolved a previous injunction in November 2025, ruling that Kalshi’s sports-related products do not qualify as "swaps" and are thus subject to Nevada’s gaming laws.
- The Fourth Circuit (Maryland): Trading at 55%, reflecting deep uncertainty after Maryland became the first state to successfully argue in district court that Congress never intended for the CFTC to override state-level gambling prohibitions.
The trading volume for these contracts has surged past $50 million as institutional legal analysts and arbitrageurs hedge against the risk of a "patchwork" regulatory environment. If Kalshi loses in the Ninth and Fourth Circuits but wins in the Third, the resulting circuit split would almost certainly trigger a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court by late 2026.
Why Traders Are Betting
The optimism in the New Jersey market is driven by the legal theory of "Field Preemption." Proponents argue that when Congress passed the CEA and designated the CFTC as the "exclusive" regulator of derivatives, it intended to occupy the entire field of financial contracts. Traders betting "Yes" believe the Third Circuit will follow the precedent set by Judge Edward Kiel, who ruled that a federally authorized Designated Contract Market (DCM) like Kalshi cannot be expected to navigate 50 different sets of state licensing laws.
Conversely, the bearish sentiment in Nevada stems from a growing judicial skepticism regarding the definition of a "swap." In November 2025, the Nevada court sided with the Nevada Gaming Control Board, arguing that contracts based on player statistics or game outcomes are "contingent wagers"—the very definition of sports betting.
Notable whale activity has been observed in these markets, with several large positions betting on a "State’s Rights" resurgence. These traders are likely tracking the amicus briefs filed by 34 state attorneys general who argue that exempting Kalshi from state oversight would create a "regulatory vacuum" where traditional sportsbooks, such as DraftKings Inc. (NASDAQ: DKNG) and Flutter Entertainment plc (NYSE: FLUT), are forced to pay state taxes and licensing fees while prediction markets operate tax-free under federal rules.
Broader Context and Implications
This conflict represents a "Constitutional Crisis" for the prediction market industry. If the courts ultimately rule against Kalshi, it would mean that every state could individually ban or tax CFTC-approved contracts. This would effectively destroy the liquidity and national reach that make prediction markets valuable tools for price discovery and forecasting.
The real-world implications extend far beyond Kalshi. A loss for federal preemption would likely embolden states to target other platforms and could even impact how traditional financial institutions handle complex derivatives that have "gaming-like" characteristics. This tension reveals a deep public sentiment divide: is a prediction market a sophisticated financial tool for hedging risk, or is it simply a high-tech "bucket shop" designed to bypass state gambling taxes?
Historically, prediction markets have been more accurate than pundits, and the current markets on these legal cases suggest a high degree of confidence that the federal government will eventually prevail in the most business-friendly circuits. However, the accuracy of these markets is now being tested by the sheer unpredictability of the "State’s Rights" arguments gaining traction in Maryland and Nevada.
What to Watch Next
The most immediate catalyst to watch is the Ninth Circuit’s upcoming decision on the Nevada "partial stay." On January 14, 2026, the district court allowed Kalshi to continue its appeal while the litigation proceeds. A definitive ruling from the Ninth Circuit is expected by late spring 2026. If the Ninth Circuit reverses the district court and sides with Kalshi, the "Yes" odds across all legal markets will likely skyrocket toward 90%.
Another key milestone is the Third Circuit’s final ruling on the New Jersey appeal. Given the high probability currently priced in, a loss for Kalshi there would be a "black swan" event, likely causing a massive liquidation across the prediction market ecosystem.
Investors should also monitor the New York State Legislature. The "ORACLE Act" (A9251), which seeks to explicitly ban political event contracts, saw its passage probability drop to 38% this week. Traders are interpreting this as a sign that state legislators are waiting for the courts to decide the preemption issue before committing to new state laws.
Bottom Line
The legal battle between Kalshi and state regulators is the final hurdle for the mainstreaming of prediction markets in the United States. The current markets suggest that while Kalshi is a favorite in the more business-friendly Eastern courts, the "State’s Rights" strongholds in the West and Mid-Atlantic present a significant risk.
This saga demonstrates that prediction markets are more than just a place to bet on the news—they are becoming an essential tool for quantifying complex legal and regulatory risks in real-time. Whether the "exclusive jurisdiction" of the CFTC can withstand the traditional police power of the states remains the billion-dollar question. For now, the "smart money" is betting on a divided judiciary, a fragmented 2026 market, and an inevitable date with the Supreme Court.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or betting advice. Prediction market participation may be subject to legal restrictions in your jurisdiction.
PredictStreet focuses on covering the latest developments in prediction markets.
Visit the PredictStreet website at https://www.predictstreet.ai/.
