NFL to Kalshi: Your $1.8B Parlay Ain't Covered By Dodd-Frank 🏈

The National Football League has urged the U.S. Supreme Court to take up New Jersey's appeal against Kalshi, backing state regulators in a closely watched dispute over whether prediction-market sports contracts fall under federal oversight or state gambling law. In an amicus brief filed Wednesday, the NFL called on the justices to grant a petition for a writ of certiorari from New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport and gaming enforcement interim director Mary Jo Flaherty, who are challenging a Third Circuit ruling that classified Kalshi's event contracts as "swaps" under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's exclusive jurisdiction.

The league, represented by former U.S. Attorney General William Barr, sided with the Sixth and Ninth Circuits, which have ruled that Dodd-Frank's definition of a swap covers instruments that hedge existing risk, not bets that create new risk. The NFL argued that federalizing sports betting regulation constitutes a "major question" the Supreme Court should resolve and warned that without action, the dispute between states and the CFTC will continue to escalate. "Waiting too long to address this issue will permit the federal-state regulatory dispute to escalate," a separate amicus brief filed by 39 U.S. states and the District of Columbia stated Wednesday.

According to the NFL's filing, NFL-related contracts accounted for $1.8 billion of the $3.3 billion traded across prediction markets on the first Sunday of the football season, representing more than half of all prediction-markets' trading volume. The league said many of the sporting event contracts available on Kalshi and rival platforms were "highly susceptible to manipulation" or "otherwise inherently objectionable." "These bets, in the NFL's view, pose the greatest threats to game integrity, because many can be manipulated by a single person, especially if known in advance—for instance, a player can alter his performance, a coach can change his team's lineup, or an official can make (or not make) certain calls," the brief stated.

The brief also faulted the CFTC's regulatory framework, noting that 18-year-olds can trade on Kalshi while most states require sports bettors to be 21, and that the agency has just 543 employees nationwide. The league said it had asked the CFTC and operators to ban contracts easily manipulated by a single party, involving injuries or officiating, or with outcomes knowable in advance, but those requests were declined. Without league-specific lists of prohibited bettors, operators' "nominal insider-trading policies or prohibitions are paper tigers," the filing added.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court had not announced whether it would grant review. Kalshi was granted an extension to respond to New Jersey's filing, giving the company until Nov. 9 to address issues related to jurisdiction, manipulable event contracts and consumer protection. Former CFTC and SEC Chair Gary Gensler and former Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., both of whom helped pass Dodd-Frank, also filed briefs backing New Jersey, while sports gaming attorney Daniel Wallach wrote on X that the NFL filing "meaningfully increases the chances of a cert grant." The league is seeking a ruling before the 2027 season and said it would redouble efforts to push for stronger integrity and consumer protections if the justices side with the Third Circuit.