The trade group, which represents 70 state gaming resorts, argued that Kalshi’s approach to sports betting via financial contracts threatens to upend the long-standing regulatory structure of Nevada’s gambling industry.
The motion follows a recent development in the ongoing legal battle, in which Kalshi obtained a temporary restraining order against the NGCB, allowing the company to continue offering its controversial event contracts while litigation proceeds.
Kalshi, a federally regulated prediction market operator, argues that its contracts are lawful under Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) oversight and should not fall under state-level gambling laws.
But the Nevada Resorts Association (NRA) warned in its filing that Kalshi’s legal theory could allow unregulated gambling to proliferate under the guise of federally approved financial instruments.
The body said: “Kalshi is attempting to by the robust consumer protections, licensing requirements, and responsible gambling measures that underpin Nevada’s regulated sports betting framework.”
The NRA further claimed that Kalshi’s position represents an existential threat to Nevada’s gaming model.
It added: “According to Kalshi, this seismic change did not occur due to a recent change in statute or regulation, but due to an event contract that Kalshi self-certified as compliant to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. But Congress does not ‘hide elephants in mouseholes.’”
The phrase, a reference to a US Supreme Court opinion, argues dramatic reinterpretation of the legal status of betting markets cannot be inferred from narrow or obscure statutory provisions.Kalshi clashes with US regulators
Kalshi, which has marketed itself as a regulated alternative to offshore prediction markets, has previously clashed with regulators over whether its products constitute gambling or financial speculation.
Its contracts resemble binary options, where s can “buy” or “sell” positions on the likelihood of specific outcomes, such as whether a particular political party will control the Senate after the next election.
Nevada regulators argue that these activities are functionally indistinguishable from sports or political betting and thus fall under state jurisdiction.
Kalshi disagrees, pointing to its registration with the CFTC as a Designated Contract Market (DCM), a status that traditionally applies to commodities exchanges like the Chicago Mercantile Exchange.
The prediction market is fighting similar legal battles against regulators in other states like New Jersey and Maryland, where it has so far proved successful in convincing the courts of its position.
This follows the CFTC moving to drop its separate case against Kalshi, in that case challenging the legality of its election event contracts.
The US derivatives regulator has moved to a much friendlier position on prediction markets since the Trump istration took charge.
Signs highlighted by commentators includes the nomination of a Kalshi board member to lead the CFTC and the news Donald Trump Jr. is working with the company as an advisor.
