Judge Jason Woodbury of Nevada’s First Judicial District Court in Carson City announced on Friday that he would extend an injunction against prediction market operator Kalshi, siding with the Nevada Gaming Control Board’s request for a preliminary injunction.
In his ruling, Judge Woodbury explicitly stated that users purchasing baseball game contracts on the Kalshi platform are engaging in activity that is "no different" from placing bets on state-licensed sportsbooks. The court had previously issued a temporary restraining order on March 20; this latest ruling extends that injunction for two weeks while the court finalizes the legal language for a permanent order.
Prediction Markets Face Compliance Crisis
Kalshi’s legal team has argued that the platform’s contracts are essentially "swaps" regulated by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)—a position the CFTC has supported in related litigation. However, Judge Woodbury rejected this argument, maintaining that the platform’s business operations constitute unauthorized gambling.
With this latest ruling, Nevada becomes the only state in the U.S. to use a court-ordered injunction to explicitly ban Kalshi’s operations. The New York-based company currently finds itself at the center of a nationwide legal firestorm over whether prediction markets should be classified as financial derivatives or gambling products.
Meanwhile, legal pressure on the industry is mounting. In an Arizona federal court, U.S. District Judge Michael Liburdi has heard Kalshi’s motion to block the state from pursuing criminal charges against it. According to gaming attorney Daniel Wallach, Judge Liburdi has decided to consolidate the CFTC’s lawsuit in the state and is expected to issue a ruling late next week.
In March, Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes filed 20 misdemeanor charges against Kalshi, accusing the company of accepting bets on sports and elections without a license, making Arizona the first state to take criminal action against the platform.
Just one day before that hearing, the CFTC took the unprecedented step of suing Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois. The move is intended to assert federal jurisdiction over prediction markets and defend the agency's regulatory authority in the face of a growing wave of state-level bans.
