New Jersey Files 332-Page SCOTUS Petition — First State to Ask Supreme Court to Rule on Prediction Markets
New Jersey AG Jennifer Davenport filed a 332-page Supreme Court petition on September 2, formally asking SCOTUS to rule on whether Dodd-Frank preempts state regulation of sports bets on CFTC-registered prediction market platforms. NJ is the losing party from the Third Circuit's April ruling for Kalshi. With the Ninth Circuit's August 28 ruling against Kalshi in direct conflict, the petition presents a textbook circuit split. Kalshi has 30 days to respond; SCOTUS has 90 days to decide whether to grant review.
New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport filed a certiorari petition with the US Supreme Court on September 2, 2026 — the first state to formally ask the Court to decide the prediction market sports contract question. The 332-page petition asks whether Dodd-Frank preempts state regulation of sports bets offered on CFTC-registered platforms. New Jersey was the losing party in the Third Circuit's April 2026 ruling, which held Kalshi's sports event contracts are swaps within exclusive CFTC jurisdiction. The Ninth Circuit's August 28 ruling held the opposite. The two circuits have now answered the same statutory question opposite ways for the same type of contract: the textbook definition of a circuit split that triggers SCOTUS review.
For UK readers, the procedural mechanics are analogous to the UK Supreme Court's certiorari process but with a specific timeline. Kalshi has 30 days from the Court's docketing of the petition to file an opposition or waive response. After that, the Court schedules the petition for conference. SCOTUS has roughly 90 days to grant or deny. Grant means the case is briefed and argued — likely late 2026 or early 2027, decision by June 2027. Denial is not a ruling on the merits; additional circuit rulings (the Second Circuit has two Kalshi appeals; the Sixth Circuit has Michigan) would produce further petitions. The Court may prefer to let the circuit development mature before intervening. The probability of SCOTUS review before year-end on Polymarket settled at approximately 46% after an initial spike to 64%, reflecting that timing remains genuinely uncertain even as the eventual outcome of SCOTUS review is widely expected.
The PASPA comparison cited by legal observers adds historical depth. New Jersey lost its first SCOTUS challenge over PASPA (the federal law banning state-authorised sports betting) in 2009 but ultimately won in 2018 when the Court struck PASPA down in Murphy v. NCAA. The outcome was eventually correct for NJ's position — state gambling authority survived — even though the route took nearly a decade of litigation. The prediction market case moves faster because the circuit split is already explicit (Third vs Ninth, April vs August) and the commercial stakes of NFL season volume running at billions per month create pressure for resolution. Whether SCOTUS takes NJ's September 2 petition or waits for a later petition from a state with a stronger procedural record, the underlying question — whether CFTC registration of an event contract displaces state gambling authority — will arrive at the Supreme Court. New Jersey, which holds a significant sports betting market it is defending from federally sanctioned competition, has structural incentive to accelerate that resolution.
The Ninth Circuit's August 28 ruling gives the NJ petition substantially more force than it would have had a week earlier. Before August 28, the petition asked SCOTUS to review a single circuit ruling in a developing legal area. After August 28, the petition presents a direct, explicit split between two of the country's most influential federal appellate courts on the same statutory question. SCOTUS's Rule 10 — which governs which cases merit review — identifies circuit splits on federal law questions as the primary basis for granting certiorari. NJ's petition is a nearly perfect application of that rule. The question is whether SCOTUS sees urgency in resolving it before the 2026-27 NFL season generates billions in contested volume under a legally uncertain regulatory framework, or whether it prefers to let the Second and Sixth Circuits weigh in before taking the case.
Operators mentioned in this article
Recent updates
Kalshi Launches Gold and Silver Perpetual Futures After CFTC Approval — First Non-Crypto Perps Cleared in the US
The CFTC approved and Kalshi launched perpetual futures on gold and silver on September 10 — the first non-cryptocurrency perps to receive US regulatory clearance. Contracts are cash-settled, perpetual, and 24/7. Kalshi has pending applications for US equities, copper, and currencies. Crypto perps have done $44 billion in notional volume since May. The launches put Kalshi in direct competition with CME and COMEX as US commodity trading venues.
Robinhood Agrees to Exit Michigan Sports Contracts by October 9 — Court-Approved Deal Described as Blueprint
Robinhood Derivatives agreed on September 4, under a court-approved stipulation, to stop new Michigan sports event contracts by September 9 and close positions by October 9. Michigan will not enforce gambling laws against Robinhood while it complies. The deal preserves Robinhood's CEA preemption argument and keeps Sixth Circuit appeals on track. Legal Sports Report called it a potential blueprint for similar interim accommodations between platforms and states.
Kalshi Seeks Ninth Circuit En Banc Rehearing While Robinhood Files Separate SCOTUS Petition
Kalshi petitioned the full Ninth Circuit (11 judges) for en banc rehearing of the August 28 3-0 ruling for Nevada on September 9. On the same day, Robinhood filed a separate SCOTUS certiorari petition from the same ruling, going directly to the Supreme Court. New Jersey already has a SCOTUS petition filed from the Third Circuit's April ruling. Two cert petitions now sit before SCOTUS on the prediction market question.