There is a new dog in the fight between event contract firm Kalshi and the Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB). The Nevada District Court has approved the Nevada Resort Association’s (NRA)request to intervene in the case, which challenges whether or not Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) sports contracts must be compliant with Nevada sports betting law.
NV Resorts Association now a party in case
The NRA requested inclusion noting that, as a group of casino operators in the state, the organization has a legal right to be a part of the proceedings, as the decision could materially affect the business of its members.
Judge Andrew Gordon granted the request, officially recognizing NRA as a party in the case going forward.
“If Kalshi prevails in this case, the NRA members likely would be placed at a considerable competitive disadvantage because Kalshi and others like it would not have to comply with Nevada’s comprehensive gaming laws, including prohibitions on bettors under 21 and types of bets allowed,” noted Gordon.
Gordon is the same judge who granted a temporary restraining order keeping Kalshi operational in the state as the case moves forward. His preliminary conclusion was that Kalshi had a strong argument that CFTC regulation supersedes state laws related to gambling and said he believed Nevada regulatory bodies lacked jurisdiction over these particular contracts.
Casino group calls event contracts ‘seismic change’
In its request for intervention the NRA took several shots at Kalshi’s expansion into the sports space.
“Kalshi’s argument in this lawsuit would result in the complete upheaval of Nevada’s gaming regulations, reversing over one hundred and fifty years of state control over this area and over seventy-five years of regulated sports betting. 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.”
While much of the debate presented in the case by regulators and Kalshi focused on the language of CFTC regulations, the NRA was more concerned with the practical impact of the financial offerings.
“There is no question that the event contracts offered by Kalshi are functionally identical to the sports bets offered by the members of the NRA. Any argument to the contrary is mere sophistry.”
In a similar case in New Jersey, the Casino Association of New Jersey filed an amicus brief in the suit between Kalshi and the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (DGE) but did not go so far as to ask to intervene in the case. As in Nevada, a judge granted a temporary injunction keeping Kalshi available in New Jersey for now, which the DGE is appealing in the Third Circuit.
