Kalshi’s Legal Battle in Nevada Heats Up as the Company Secures Partial Stay

Prediction markets powerhouse Kalshi has just been embroiled in legal trouble in Nevada amid a broader regulatory pushback against event contract providers. With that said, the company has now secured a partial stay to its case against the gaming regulator in the Silver State.

Kalshi’s Battle Against the NGCB Rages on

Kalshi’s clash with the Nevada regulator kicked off several months ago when the Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB) ordered the company to stop doing business in the state. The NGCB argued that Kalshi’s event contracts were way too similar to sports betting and that the company’s business in Nevada violated local regulations.

While other regulators have also slammed prediction markets as “unregulated sports betting,” Kalshi has insisted that its products are under the purview of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which allows it to operate in virtually all states.

Kalshi’s leadership defiantly said that it will only exit certain markets if ordered to do so by the CFTC.

Kalshi’s battle in Nevada seemed to be taking a favorable turn for the company until Judge Andrew P. Gordon reversed a preliminary injunction, saying that Kalshi is subject to Nevada’s gaming laws, despite the platform’s insistence on the contrary.

Kalshi later appealed this decision to the Ninth Circuit and asked the entire case to be paused. The judge has now partially granted this request.

The Prediction Market Secures Partial Stay

The stay was approved by judge Gordon, who said that the pause will allow the Ninth Circuit to consider Kalshi’s appeal of the November ruling. At the same time, however, Gordon refused to grant a discovery stay, forcing Kalshi and its adversaries to continue litigating the case and exchanging documents and evidence while the appeal proceeds.

In the meantime, deadlines for dispositive motions and the suggested joint pretrial order have been postponed and will be reintroduced once Kalshi’s November appeal has been resolved.

Allowing the discovery to continue means that the case could return to the district court no matter the outcome of Kalshi’s November appeal. Gordon noted that the decision is likely to provide guidance without resolving the case.