The NFL has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to preserve state authority over sports-related prediction markets, arguing that contracts tied to game outcomes should be regulated like sports betting.
The league filed an amicus brief supporting New Jersey in its dispute with Kalshi. The case concerns whether federal commodities law gives the Commodity Futures Trading Commission exclusive authority over sports event contracts or whether states can apply gambling laws to those products.
The NFL said prediction-market activity tied to football has already reached substantial levels. On the first Sunday of the current season, NFL-related contracts accounted for $1.8 billion of $3.3 billion in total prediction-market trading volume.
“Event contracts related to NFL games make up a substantial share of these markets’ overall trading volume: On the first Sunday of this NFL season, more than half of all prediction-markets’ trading volume – $1.8 billion out of $3.3 billion total – related to the NFL,” the league told the Supreme Court.
NFL Points to Integrity and Consumer Risks
The league’s concerns focus on contracts linked to outcomes that players, coaches, officials or other insiders could influence or know in advance.
Examples include injuries, officiating decisions and specific plays such as missed field goals. The NFL has previously asked prediction-market operators to restrict those categories.
“The [Commodity Futures Trading] Commission’s failure even to reference such objectionable contracts that the NFL identified months ago — contracts that have been and continue to be listed as contracts by operators like Kalshi — is deeply concerning and creates significant risks for the NFL’s players, coaches, and officials and market participants,” the league said.
The NFL also wants a minimum customer age of 21, matching the standard used in most state-regulated sports betting markets. Some prediction platforms permit users from age 18.
“Neither the CFTC nor the prediction market companies themselves— despite our persistent urging — have banned categories of bets susceptible to manipulation or set a 21 age limit.”
Commissioner Roger Goodell has said the NFL is taking a cautious approach to commercial relationships with prediction-market operators.
“We don’t feel like we have to be the first in this. We feel like we’re going to be right, and the best thing to do is be patient,” he said.
CFTC and Prediction Platforms Defend Federal Oversight
The CFTC has pushed back on suggestions that it has failed to engage with the league.
“Since day 1, the CFTC has engaged with the NFL regarding the agency’s rulemaking agenda and policy priorities. It’s unfortunate the NFL declined to sign an MOU with the CFTC which would’ve provided the league the ability to better discuss, cooperate, and exchange information with us to promote the integrity and resilience of prediction markets,” Brooke Nethercott, public affairs director for the CFTC, stated.
Kalshi has also argued that federal regulation can address the NFL’s concerns.
“We have consistently tried to engage proactively and constructively with the NFL to collaborate on market integrity with no response,” Kalshi spokesperson Elisabeth Diana said, according to CNBC. “We hope they change their position and start engaging to help ensure the integrity of sports.”
A separate Kalshi statement said:
“Kalshi’s top priority is the integrity of its markets. That priority is reflected in the fact that other major sports league and integrity partner in the United States is partnering with Kalshi—including the MLB, NHL, USTA and others. Contrary to the NFL’s statements, the CFTC is actively policing sports-related markets, which are now listed on nearly every US commodities exchange. The CFTC’s ongoing rulemaking addresses many of the NFL’s supposed concerns. And those rules sit atop the same comprehensive system of federal enforcement that protects trillions of dollars of transactions in US markets.”
Polymarket has likewise supported a federal framework.
“Polymarket shares the NFL’s commitment to preserving the integrity of the game, which is why we’ve built advanced market surveillance tools and are actively collaborating with the CFTC, SEC, and other professional leagues toward a harmonized federal framework that delivers a stronger, more consistent form of integrity compared to a patchwork of disconnected state laws built for a bygone era,” a Polymarket spokesperson said.
Supreme Court Asked to Clarify State Authority
The NFL argues that gambling regulation traditionally belongs to states and that sports event contracts should not fall outside that system simply because operators classify them as financial products.
“It is well established, however, that regulating gambling is among states’ sovereign police powers,” states the NFL’s brief. “What constitutional power allows Congress to override states’ traditional police powers to regulate intrastate gambling?”
The league also urged the Court to act promptly.
“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 in the brief.
The Coalition for Prediction Markets responded by defending the CFTC’s role.
“Contrary to suggestions that sports-related prediction markets lack oversight, the CFTC is actively policing these markets and advancing rulemaking to address concerns raised by sports leagues. These financial markets are subject to comprehensive federal oversight, including surveillance, fraud prevention, and enforcement against manipulation,” a coalition spokesperson said in a statement.
The Supreme Court case could determine whether states retain authority over sports-related prediction contracts when those products overlap with regulated sports wagering.