The National Football League is asking the Supreme Court to settle the regulatory authority over prediction markets, asserting in a legal filing that states already managing sports betting are best suited to oversee these sports-related contracts.
The NFL’s position is detailed in an amicus brief filed Thursday, supporting New Jersey’s petition for the Supreme Court to determine who governs prediction markets. These platforms allow users to trade on the outcomes of future events. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has historically claimed exclusive federal jurisdiction, while many states argue that the yes-or-no nature of these contracts resembles gambling and falls under their regulatory powers.
"Absent the clarity that only this Court can provide, (prediction market) operators will continue exploiting the gap between state and federal regulation, endangering consumers and the integrity of sports events across the country," the NFL's lawyers wrote in the brief.
Data presented by the NFL indicates the significant overlap between sports and prediction markets. According to the league's brief, on the first Sunday of the current NFL season, $1.8 billion of the $3.3 billion total trading volume on prediction markets was tied to the league.
"Any delay from the Court will result in increasing consumer harm and risk to game integrity,” the NFL stated in its filing.
Representatives from prediction market operators have offered differing perspectives. Kalshi spokeswoman Elisabeth Diana stated that the company's priority is market integrity and pointed to partnerships with other sports organizations. Diana argued that the CFTC is actively regulating sports-related markets and that the commission's ongoing rulemaking addresses many of the NFL's concerns, offering a robust federal enforcement system.
A spokesperson for Polymarket echoed a commitment to game integrity, expressing support for a federal framework that provides consistent oversight, contrasting it with a fragmented state-by-state approach.
State Support for Regulation
Ohio filed a brief Wednesday, urging the Supreme Court to align with New Jersey and affirm states' authority to regulate prediction markets, similar to how they regulate casino gambling and sports betting. This filing was reportedly backed by 38 states, including attorneys general from both Republican and Democratic parties in states such as Arkansas, California, Illinois, Missouri, New York, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania.
The growing legal division among federal appeals courts makes a Supreme Court review more likely. The 6th and 9th U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals have ruled in favor of states' regulatory power, while the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals previously sided with Kalshi. The NFL's brief specifically noted that, "As between the two approaches, the NFL believes the Sixth and Ninth Circuits got it right, given the current landscape."
League Concerns Over Enforcement
The NFL also raised questions about the CFTC's capacity for enforcement, noting the commission's limited staff relative to the breadth of derivatives they oversee beyond event contracts. "Without adequate staff engaged in oversight and enforcement, even the best regulations cannot meaningfully ensure game integrity and consumer protection,” the league's brief stated.
The NFL has reportedly urged the CFTC and prediction markets to adopt a list of prohibited wagers deemed high-risk to game integrity, a request that has not been met. The league has also advocated for an age limit of 21 for trading on prediction markets, an increase from the current 18.
Diana of Kalshi stated that the company has sought collaboration with the NFL on market integrity but has not received a response.