Ohio Escalates Post-Sixth Circuit — Cease-and-Desist to 10 Operators, but Platforms Keep Operating
Emboldened by its Sixth Circuit win, Ohio escalated enforcement against prediction markets. Governor Mike DeWine and the Ohio Casino Control Commission issued cease-and-desist letters dated October 2 to 10 operators, including Polymarket and Robinhood, with an October 16 compliance deadline and penalties up to the value gained from contracts. Kalshi was excluded because a court order already covers it. As of October 20, platforms were continuing to operate in Ohio despite the deadline passing. Polymarket has sued the Commission and Ohio AG Andy Wilson on Commerce Clause and CEA-preemption grounds; Wilson is expected to sue non-compliant operators.
Ohio moved from litigation to active enforcement following its September 25 Sixth Circuit victory. Governor Mike DeWine and the Ohio Casino Control Commission issued cease-and-desist letters dated October 2, 2026 to 10 prediction market operators, including Polymarket and Robinhood, setting an October 16 compliance deadline and warning of penalties that could reach the value the operators gained from offering the contracts. Kalshi was not among the 10 recipients — reporting indicates this is because a court order already defines what the state requires of Kalshi, following the Sixth Circuit ruling in the consolidated Ohio and Tennessee case. The Sixth Circuit had held that Ohio can apply its gambling laws to Kalshi's sports event contracts, giving Ohio binding appellate authority within the circuit to enforce against the platforms.
The platforms, however, have largely declined to comply. As of October 20, reporting from the Ohio Capital Journal and others indicated that prediction market operators were continuing to offer sports event contracts in Ohio despite the October 16 deadline having passed. The platforms' position rests on the federal preemption argument and on the fact that the Sixth Circuit ruling, while adverse, is the subject of Kalshi's continuing challenge and is part of the broader dispute now before the Supreme Court. Polymarket has gone further and sued the Ohio Casino Control Commission and Ohio Attorney General Andy Wilson, arguing that the state's enforcement conflicts with the Commerce Clause and is preempted by the Commodity Exchange Act. The platforms are treating Ohio the way they have treated other states: continuing to operate under the federal-authorization theory while the ultimate legal question remains unresolved, and litigating against the state rather than complying.
Ohio's response is to prepare for direct litigation. Attorney General Wilson is expected to file lawsuits against operators that continue offering sports event contracts in Ohio past the deadline, and Governor DeWine has signaled that the state will move toward enforcement rather than relying on warnings. This sets up a direct confrontation in a circuit where the state already holds a favorable appellate ruling. Ohio's position is stronger than that of states in other circuits because the Sixth Circuit has already ruled that Ohio can regulate these contracts — meaning Ohio does not face the same uncertainty about the governing law that states in circuits without a ruling confront. If Ohio sues the non-compliant operators, it can cite binding Sixth Circuit precedent, which puts the platforms in the difficult position of defying an appellate ruling that directly governs their conduct in the state.
The Ohio standoff illustrates the limits of the platforms' wait-for-SCOTUS strategy. In states without a circuit ruling, or in the Third Circuit where Kalshi won, continuing to operate while the Supreme Court question is pending is a defensible posture. But in the Sixth Circuit, where binding appellate precedent now holds that the states can regulate, continuing to operate is closer to defiance of a controlling ruling than to good-faith reliance on an unresolved question. The platforms are betting that the Supreme Court will ultimately reverse the Sixth Circuit, and that operating in the interim will not expose them to penalties that survive a favorable SCOTUS ruling. Ohio is betting the opposite — that its appellate win entitles it to enforce now, and that the penalties for continued operation will accumulate regardless of what the Supreme Court eventually decides. The confrontation in Ohio is the first real test of what happens when a state with binding circuit precedent meets platforms determined to keep operating until the Supreme Court speaks.
Operators mentioned in this article
Recent updates
Crypto.com and Novig Sue Missouri as Market Leaders Hold Back — Eighth Circuit Now in Play via Iowa
Crypto.com and Novig filed federal lawsuits on October 16 challenging Missouri's cease-and-desist orders, arguing their sports event contracts fall under exclusive CFTC jurisdiction. The suits came as Missouri's 30-day compliance window closed. Notably, the market leaders — Kalshi, Polymarket, Robinhood, and Underdog — have not sued; Missouri said it is in 'ongoing discussions' with Kalshi. The outcome is tied to the Eighth Circuit, which is now weighing the same preemption question in Kalshi's appeal of a preliminary injunction denial in Iowa — the fourth federal circuit to take up the prediction market question.
Midterm Election Betting Tops $220M — Double the Entire 2024 Cycle — as Public Opposition Mounts
Traders have wagered more than $220 million on the 2026 congressional midterms across Kalshi and Polymarket, more than double the $92 million bet across the entire 2024 cycle, according to a Reuters analysis of Anti-Corruption Data Collective data published October 14. The 2026 cycle has more than 21,000 individual markets, up from 463 tracked in 2024. Volume is concentrated in a few races, led by the Texas Senate contest. The growth comes despite a Reuters/Ipsos poll finding that most Americans oppose using prediction markets to bet on elections, and amid continuing concern from election officials about integrity and insider trading.
Taiwan and Norway Move Against Kalshi — International Blocks Spread on Two Different Legal Theories
International enforcement against prediction markets accelerated in mid-October. A New Taipei District Court ordered Taiwan to block Kalshi and Coinbase on October 15 under Taiwan's election law, which prohibits profit-driven gambling tied to election results, roughly six weeks before Taiwan's November 28 local elections. Separately, Norway's gambling regulator Lotteritilsynet proposed DNS-blocking 62 unlicensed sites including Kalshi and Polymarket, with operators given until October 15 to respond. The two actions rest on different legal theories — election-integrity law in Taiwan, gambling-licensing law in Norway — but both add to the growing list of countries treating the platforms as unauthorized.