The National Football League on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to take up a case over who has the power to regulate prediction markets, arguing that bets placed on the platforms should be governed by state gambling laws.
The league filed an amicus brief in a dispute between Kalshi and the state of New Jersey. New Jersey has asked the justices to weigh in on the issue, which has produced conflicting rulings at the appellate level.
In its filing, the NFL warned that the disagreement among the courts is creating real problems for the league.
"This split of authority, and the consequent uncertainty about the regulatory oversight of sports wagering on DCMs [designated contract markets], pose a significant challenge to the NFL's game-integrity and consumer-protection efforts," the league wrote.
At the heart of the battle is how these wagers should be classified. Kalshi and other prediction markets argue that the bets they offer are financial instruments known as "swaps," which are federally regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
States see it differently. They view the wagers as gambling and argue they should fall under state jurisdiction.
Under the Trump administration, the CFTC has sided with the prediction markets, filing numerous lawsuits against states that have moved to enforce their gambling laws against the platforms.
The NFL said there would be "less cause for concern" if the CFTC and prediction markets "were to adopt the same robust safeguards and engage in the same vigorous oversight" as state and tribal regulators and traditional sports betting.
"But that is not what is happening today," the league wrote.
According to the NFL, the agency and the platforms "have stuck to a more laissez-faire approach." The league pointed to their refusal to adopt a series of prohibited wagers that the NFL requires of sportsbooks, as well as their decision to keep the minimum age at 18 rather than 21.
The league pressed the justices to act quickly, before another season passes without a resolution.
"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," the NFL wrote.
The league also threw its support behind rulings from two federal appeals courts. The NFL said the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals "got it right" when they sided with the states, arguing that prediction market wagers should not be treated as "swaps" under federal law.
The NFL isn't alone in pushing the high court to step in. A bipartisan group of 39 states also filed an amicus brief Thursday urging the Supreme Court to hear the case. Those states backed New Jersey's position that states should have the authority to regulate prediction markets.
