Share 
A national group of gaming lawmakers is backing New Jersey’s bid to take its legal fight with Kalshi to the US Supreme Court.
At issue is whether the state can apply its sports betting laws to sports contracts offered on Kalshi’s prediction market.
The National Council of Legislators from Gaming States (NCLGS) filed a brief Sept. 22 urging the justices to hear New Jersey’s appeal. The group argues that states should retain the power to regulate sports-related gambling offered within their borders.
Why New Jersey and Kalshi are in court
Kalshi offers contracts tied to the outcomes of sports games and other events. New Jersey’s Division of Gaming Enforcement says its sports contracts are wagers and that Kalshi needs a state license to offer them to New Jersey residents.
In March 2025, the division told Kalshi to stop offering sports contracts in the state. Regulators also objected to contracts involving college events played in New Jersey.
New Jersey does not allow bets on college games played in the state or involving a New Jersey school, even when the game takes place elsewhere.
Kalshi sued to block the state’s order. It argued that its sports contracts fall under federal oversight because they are traded on an exchange registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). New Jersey says federal oversight does not exempt Kalshi from its sports betting laws.
A federal judge temporarily blocked New Jersey from enforcing its sports betting laws against Kalshi’s sports contracts while the case proceeds. In April, a divided federal appeals court upheld that order, finding that Kalshi had a reasonable chance of succeeding with its argument. The underlying lawsuit remains unresolved.
What the lawmakers’ brief adds
NCLGS argues that federal oversight of Kalshi’s exchange should not put its sports contracts beyond the reach of state gambling laws. Otherwise, the group says, companies could offer sports markets in New Jersey without following rules that apply to licensed sportsbooks.
Those rules include a minimum betting age of 21, a self-exclusion program, and requirements to provide information about help for problem gambling.
Operators must demonstrate financial stability before running a sports pool, and state regulators can investigate and audit them afterward.
New Jersey also bars people with inside information – including athletes, coaches, and referees – from placing sports bets. These requirements are part of the state system NCLGS wants to preserve.
The group also points to a split between federal appeals courts. The Third Circuit’s preliminary ruling favored Kalshi in New Jersey.
In a separate Nevada case, the Ninth Circuit found Kalshi had not shown that federal law was likely to override state gambling rules. NCLGS says the opposing rulings leave states uncertain about which rules they can enforce and gives the Supreme Court a reason to hear the case.
What happens next for New Jersey players
Kalshi’s response to New Jersey’s appeal is due Nov. 9, a month later than originally scheduled. Kalshi can use it to argue that the Supreme Court should leave the appeals court ruling in place.
If the justices decline to hear the case, the temporary order blocking New Jersey’s enforcement will remain in place while the underlying lawsuit continues.
If justices take the case, they will consider whether New Jersey can apply its sports betting laws to Kalshi’s contracts. Agreeing to hear the appeal would not, by itself, change what Kalshi can offer players in the state.
The High Court begins its next session on Monday.
