Court rejects Kalshi appeal on Ohio and Tennessee sports betting rules
A federal appeals court ruled Friday that Kalshi did not adequately show its sports event contracts are swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. The decision adds to a growing split among circuit courts on the issue.
A federal appeals court on Friday rejected Kalshi’s appeal concerning sports betting rules in Ohio and Tennessee. The court found that Kalshi did not adequately demonstrate its sports event contracts qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. The dispute sits at the intersection of federal commodities regulation and state sports betting oversight. The decision also contributes to a growing split among circuit courts over how these contracts should be treated.
The ruling may affect how sports event contracts are offered in Ohio and Tennessee, potentially influencing bettors, exchanges, and state regulators. Because circuit courts are split, businesses and consumers could face uncertainty about whether federal commodities oversight or state sports betting rules govern these products. Further appeals or regulatory responses may shape access and compliance costs, though the immediate practical impact remains unclear.