California Backs States in Kalshi Gambling Fight
California joined two bipartisan multistate amicus briefs supporting New York and Wisconsin's right to enforce state gambling laws against Kalshi.
Updated on Nov. 8, 2026 in Gambling
Live Poll
Should states be able to ban prediction markets like Kalshi from offering sports contracts?
California Attorney General Rob Bonta joined two bipartisan multistate amicus briefs on Friday supporting New York and Wisconsin's efforts to enforce state sports gaming and gambling laws against prediction market operator Kalshi. It is the tenth and eleventh time California has joined multistate efforts targeting Kalshi and similar companies.
Why it matters
The briefs argue that federal preemption of state gambling laws as applied to prediction market providers is improper and undermines states' traditional role in regulating gambling and protecting vulnerable residents. The outcome could determine whether states or federal regulators control how sports-event contracts are offered to the public.
California's filings are its 10th and 11th multistate amicus efforts against Kalshi and similar prediction market companies, joining a coalition of 38 attorneys general. The New York district court denied Kalshi's preliminary injunction, and the CFTC has appealed the Wisconsin decision to the Seventh Circuit.
The players
Rob Bonta
Rob Bonta is the Attorney General of California, who announced the state's participation in the multistate amicus briefs.
Kalshi
Kalshi is a prediction market operator that offers sports-event contracts and is contesting state gambling enforcement in court.
The details
The New York Gaming Commission sent Kalshi a cease-and-desist order, which Kalshi challenged in court. After Wisconsin filed suit in state court against Coinbase, Kalshi, Robinhood, Polymarket, and Crypto.com, the companies moved the cases to federal court, and the CFTC sued Wisconsin; the district court denied the CFTC's injunction request.
Timeline
Friday, before November 8, 2026: California joins two bipartisan multistate amicus briefs supporting New York and Wisconsin.
Culture Shift
The dispute over whether federal commodities law displaces state gambling law for prediction markets reflects a broader expansion of sports betting-style products into financial platforms. States are asserting their traditional authority to police gambling as those products reach ordinary consumers.
Whether residents in states like New York and Wisconsin can access Kalshi's sports-event contracts depends on how courts resolve the preemption dispute. The pending appeals in the Second and Seventh Circuits will determine which rules apply to these products.
The takeaway
Prediction market products sit at the boundary between federal financial regulation and state gambling law, and the appellate rulings will shape how they can be offered. Readers following sports betting should watch the Second and Seventh Circuit decisions.
Further reading
For more on the regulation of wagering products, explore our Gambling coverage.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Gold Rush Cam.
Live Poll
Should states be able to ban prediction markets like Kalshi from offering sports contracts?
