State officials in Nevada are leading a nationwide legal push to keep prediction‑market platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket under state gambling regulations. The Nevada Gaming Control Board, the National Football League and attorneys general from 39 states have filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether these platforms are gambling or federally regulated financial markets.

Why Nevada says the stakes are high

Nevada collects roughly $1.1 billion each year in gaming taxes, a revenue stream that funds public schools, roads, Medicaid and other essential services. Gaming Control Board Chairman Mike Dreitzer warned that if sports‑betting moves to prediction markets that escape state tax rules, the state could lose a substantial portion of that funding.

“They’re basically depriving the students and the kids of Nevada of better public education, better roads, better housing, Medicaid,” said Hon. George Assad during a board meeting. “All the state funding that tax dollars are being lost to through Kalshi and other prediction markets not paying their taxes here.”

Regulators cite consumer‑protection concerns

Beyond lost tax revenue, Nevada officials argue that prediction markets pose risks to underage gambling, money‑laundering safeguards and problem‑gambling protections. Unlike licensed sportsbooks, which require bettors to be 21, many prediction‑market platforms allow participants as young as 18. “Every parent with a senior in high school or kids attending college should be immensely concerned,” said Tres York of the American Gaming Association.

York also noted that these platforms spend hundreds of millions of dollars on advertising aimed at young people, often on channels that would never be authorized for a state‑licensed sportsbook.

Federal regulators take a different view

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) maintains that prediction markets are a type of “swap” and therefore fall under its jurisdiction. The agency recently issued an Interim Final Rule reaffirming that casino‑style gambling products are excluded from the swap definition.

“Casino‑style gambling products are not derivatives,” said CFTC Chairman Michael S. Selig in a statement. “The Commission today provides clarity regarding the limits of its regulatory remit by codifying the exclusion of casino‑style gambling products from the swap definition.”

Trump administration’s position

President Donald Trump previously said it is “critically important” for the CFTC to retain exclusive authority over prediction markets. While the administration argues that a uniform federal approach could simplify regulation, Nevada officials contend that the CFTC’s laissez‑faire stance creates opportunities for insider trading and threatens game integrity.

We respectfully disagree with the claim that federal exclusive authority best protects Nevada’s gamblers and taxpayers. State‑level oversight has a proven track record of safeguarding consumers and ensuring that gambling revenue supports local communities.

Legal backdrop and next steps

In August, a federal appeals court sided with Nevada, ruling that placing sports bets is still gambling even if the platform calls it something else. However, a New Jersey federal court reached the opposite conclusion, highlighting the regulatory patchwork the Supreme Court is being asked to resolve.

The NFL has joined Nevada’s effort, arguing that inconsistent regulation threatens game integrity and consumer protection. “Uneven regulation across the country can pose real challenges to game integrity and consumer protection,” the league wrote in a court filing.

Kalshi has until Nov. 9 to file its response, and the Supreme Court is not expected to decide whether to take the case until December.

What it means for Nevada families

If the Court rules in favor of state regulation, Nevada will preserve its gaming tax base, protecting funding for schools, infrastructure and health programs that directly benefit families across the state. It would also keep consumer‑protection standards that Nevada has built over decades.

Conversely, a decision that hands exclusive authority to the CFTC could shift billions of dollars out of Nevada’s coffers and weaken the state’s ability to enforce age limits and responsible‑gaming measures.

Original reporting: KTNV 13 Action News Las Vegas (local) — read the source article.