Share 
Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie launched a forceful critique of sports prediction markets in a interview with CNBC’s Contessa Brewer. He branded the markets as illegal, harmful to consumer protections, and a threat to the integrity of sports.
Christie played a pivotal role in overturning the federal ban on New Jersey sportsbooks and now serves as a strategic adviser to the American Gaming Association.
Christie used the platform to air his concerns about the rapid expansion of prediction market (PM) contracts tied to future sporting outcomes.
“These markets are, bottom line, against the law, and they need to be stopped. They’re illegal. You can’t bet on sports outside of the state structures.”
Law, integrity, and the state vs. federal fight
At the heart of Christie’s critique is a legal argument that platforms offering prediction contracts – whether they classify them as futures, derivatives, or event contracts – are operating outside state gambling laws by leaning on federal oversight from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
“The idea that the CFTC is regulating sports is untrue, and Kalshi knows it,” he said, referring to one of the largest exchanges offering such products.
Christie described a regulatory bind: While state gaming authorities enforce licensing, consumer protections, responsible gambling measures, and integrity monitoring in traditional operators, these oversight tools don’t apply to PMs.
“It’s bad for the integrity of sport, it’s bad for consumer protection, it hurts tax revenue in states. And, bottom line, it’s against the law.”
Potential for corruption, Christie warns
Christie also warned about new contract types emerging on these markets. which include wagers on whether college athletes enter the NCAA transfer portal.
“Imagine how much that could be manipulated. A gambler offers a huge amount of money for a young man or woman to not go into the transfer portal.
That doesn’t just distort competition – it can corrupt these athletes and change the nature of the sport.”
Legal battle could reach Supreme Court
Christie said PM’s legal status will likely end up before the Supreme Court, setting up a high-stakes showdown over federal authority vs. state-by-state gaming regulation.
“This issue isn’t going away. It’s going to make its way up to the highest court in the land.”
A New Jersey case is currently in litigation. The Third Circuit Court granted PM Kalshi a preliminary injunction to continue operating for now. The state appealed that decision in June.
Industry reaction and broader context
Christie’s comments come as PMs expand into mainstream platforms and products. Some major operator brands have even launched their own “prediction” lines, further blurring the distinction between regulated sports betting and federally regulated markets.
State regulators argue that if two consumers trade on sporting outcomes for profit, it functionally resembles sports wagering and should be subject to the same safeguards, taxes, and licensing requirements for traditional sportsbooks.
Meanwhile, operators such as Kalshi and Polymarket maintain that their products are commodities or financial contracts, not traditional wagers, and should remain under CFTC jurisdiction.
