The U.S. Supreme Court has not said whether it will hear a major dispute over sports-related prediction markets, but pressure for the justices to intervene is growing. Multiple parties filed briefs last week arguing that contracts tied to sporting events should be treated as gambling products regulated by states rather than as swaps overseen by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
According to CoinDesk, the filings were submitted by former Senator Chris Dodd, former Commodity Futures Trading Commission and Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Gary Gensler, the National Football League, 39 states and the District of Columbia, 145 tribal nations, and other interested parties. Many of them asked the court to accept a case involving whether sports-based prediction contracts fall within the federal definition of a swap.
A widening legal split
The dispute has become more significant because federal appeals courts disagree about which regulator has authority. Two appellate courts have found that prediction markets involving sports are gambling products that should be governed by state law. A third appellate court reached the opposite conclusion, finding that the CFTC has jurisdiction.
That split gives the Supreme Court a reason to consider the issue, although the court has not indicated whether it will take up the case. Most of the briefs filed last week urged the justices to support the states’ position. Their argument is that at least sports-related prediction markets belong under state gambling rules, not under a federal derivatives framework.
The question has practical importance for companies offering these products. Prediction markets allow users to buy or sell contracts linked to the outcome of an event. Depending on how regulators classify them, those contracts may be subject to state gambling restrictions or federal rules applying to swaps and designated contract markets.
Arguments over Dodd-Frank
At the center of the dispute is the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the 2010 law that expanded the CFTC’s role in derivatives markets. Dodd, whose name is attached to the legislation, argued in his brief that the law was not designed to let the federal agency displace state governments’ authority over gambling.
His filing challenged a 2-1 decision by a panel of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. That panel ruled that the CFTC had jurisdiction over swaps and prediction markets connected to sports. Dodd’s brief drew a line between financial derivatives and sports wagers, arguing that popular products such as parlays do not serve the same purposes as conventional derivatives.
The filing said parlays that combine wagers on point spreads or individual player performances across different games, cities and sports do not support hedging or price discovery. It also argued that such products lack the type of potential financial, economic or commercial consequences required to qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act.
Dodd further disputed the CFTC’s claim to “exclusive jurisdiction.” His brief said that language identifies the CFTC as the federal regulator for financial instruments covered by the law, but does not automatically override state and tribal gambling laws for every contract listed on a designated contract market.
Gensler, who helped implement regulations under Dodd-Frank while leading the CFTC, made a similar argument. He said the law did not give the agency power to preempt state gambling rules, an argument he has also presented in an appellate case.
CFTC proposes its own framework
The NFL also filed a brief, saying it has a direct interest in the case because sports betting is closely connected to professional sports. The league criticized what it described as the CFTC’s “laissez-faire” approach and pointed to differences between state oversight of gambling companies and federal oversight of designated contract markets, the licensing category used by prediction-market providers.
The CFTC addressed the classification question on Friday by issuing an interim final rule and a separate proposal. The agency said casino-style gambling is outside its definition of a swap, while event contracts remain within that definition. It also wants to formally specify that contracts concerning sports, politics, cultural events and weather are event contracts covered as swaps.
An interim final rule can take effect while the agency considers or completes further regulatory steps, while a proposal sets out a framework for potential formal rules. Together, the CFTC’s actions provide its current interpretation of how event-based products fit within federal derivatives law, even as the courts consider the broader jurisdictional conflict.
Kalshi, a prediction-market provider involved in the dispute, requested and received more time to respond to the Supreme Court. Its new deadline is November 9, 2026. The source material also said there were no congressional hearings being tracked for that week.
Current market picture
Moneyiar market data recorded on October 13, 2026, at about 09:39 +03:30 showed mixed performance among the listed crypto assets:
- Ethereum was trading at $2,509.80, down 1.71% over 24 hours and 7.22% over seven days.
- AKEDO was at $0.02480, up 2.72% in 24 hours but down 17.70% over seven days.
- ONEchain stood at $0.11882, down 7.77% over 24 hours and 18.62% over seven days.
- RedStone was priced at $0.15577, falling 5.24% over 24 hours and 5.60% over seven days.
These figures are Moneyiar data at the stated time and describe market prices and percentage changes; they do not indicate how the legal proceedings will develop.
