In a filing reported by Law360, New York Attorney General Letitia James asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to deny Kalshi’s request for protection from New York’s sports-betting enforcement. The dispute is over whether Kalshi can offer sports-event contracts in the state.
The conflict began after the New York State Gaming Commission sent Kalshi a cease-and-desist letter on Oct. 24, 2025, telling it to stop operating an unlicensed mobile sports wagering platform in New York in connection with any sports event. Kalshi sued three days later, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and arguing that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has exclusive jurisdiction. The case turns on event contracts, a type of derivative whose payoff depends on a specified event, and Kalshi says it offers consumers the chance to trade sports-event contracts by taking yes and no positions on future outcomes.
The court said Kalshi began listing such contracts on Jan. 22, 2025, after self-certifying several tied to sporting events. Those contracts allowed users to position themselves on outcomes such as which teams would advance in the NCAA College Basketball Championship or who would win the U.S. Open Golf Championship.
On July 7, U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres denied Kalshi’s request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. She concluded that New York gambling laws, as applied to Kalshi’s sports-event contracts, are not preempted by the Commodity Exchange Act, and that Kalshi had not made a clear or substantial showing of likely success on the merits. The court also said New York law requires a licence for sports wagering and dismissed the Gaming Commission from the suit on Eleventh Amendment immunity grounds.
After that ruling, Letitia James and Governor Kathy Hochul said New York’s gambling laws are meant to protect consumers and that the state would continue to hold gambling platforms accountable, including prediction markets. James said Kalshi had tried to ignore those laws and had lost in court.
Kalshi then filed an emergency request on July 15, seeking protection from future state enforcement while its appeal continued, but Torres said the motion offered no new authority and no unusual or compelling circumstances. A Second Circuit ruling remains pending.
