NFL Supports States in Potential SCOTUS Fight Over Sports Event Contracts

• The NFL today submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of New Jersey’s petition to the U.S. Supreme Court
• NFL reports its top priority is to preserve the integrity of its games and protect its fans
• The league noted in its brief that it agrees with the Sixth and Ninth Circuit rulings that allow state gambling laws to regulate sports event contracts

---

The NFL today submitted an an amicus curiae brief in support of New Jersey’s petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, noting in its brief that sports event contracts pose a threat to the league’s game integrity and it agrees with the Sixth and Ninth Circuit rulings that allow state gambling laws to regulate the markets.

Game integrity is fundamental to the NFL, counsel noted in the league’s amicus curiae brief to the U.S. Supreme Court. The league noted that prediction market operators have yet to instill the same safeguards for sports event contracts to protect game integrity as licensed sports betting operators have for their betting markets.

“Although the NFL, among others, has encouraged the Commission and the DCMs to adopt safeguards and rules for sports wagering like those in the state-regulated world of traditional LSBs, the Commission and DCMs so far have stuck to a more laissez-faire approach,” the league wrote.

More Regulatory Oversight and Safeguards for Sportsbooks

The NFL filed its amicus curiae brief in support of New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport’s recent writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court, which appeals a U.S. Third Circuit’s ruling in favor of Kalshi and asks for an evaluation of whether or not states can regulate sports event contracts through their own gambling laws.

New Jersey’s filed writ of certiorari presents the following question to SCOTUS:

Whether the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act preempted States from regulating sports bets that occur within their jurisdictions if those bets are offered on markets registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

If the writ is accepted by SCOTUS – and typically only 1% are accepted by the court each year – it would only be the beginning of a process that likely would not see a ruling until sometime in 2027.

Counsel for the NFL wrote in its brief that prediction market operators and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has yet to adopt its list of “prohibited wagers” for its sports event contracts, despite the belief from the league that the bets on the list “pose the greatest threats to game integrity, because many can be manipulated by a single person.” The league ask its operators to prohibit bets that are “inherently objectionable,” such as those centered around injuries, bets centered around officiating, and bets that can be pre-determined, such as if a team’s first play will be a run or pass, be prohibited.

It noted that prediction market operators have yet to adopt all of these prohibitions, while sports betting operators have been more agreeable.

“Game integrity is essential to the fair and orderly administration of sports-related event contracts that trade on, or in connection with, NFL games, and to the protection of participants in these markets—often NFL fans—from fraudulent or manipulative behavior. But despite the NFL’s urging, the Commission and operators like respondent Kalshi have thus far failed to implement appropriate safeguards to protect the integrity of sporting events and consumers,” the league wrote.

Additionally, the NFL criticized prediction market operators allowing individuals 18 and older to access their markets, while the vast majority of sports betting operators require users to be 21.

League Agrees With Sixth and Ninth Circuit Rulings

The league specifically reported that it agrees with the rulings that came out of the Sixth and Ninth Circuits.  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed a denial of a Kalshi preliminary injunction motion in Ohio and reversed a granted preliminary injunction in Tennessee, as the prediction market company faces its latest setback in the court of appeals.

A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled Kalshi did not show that its sports event contracts satisfied the statutory definition of a swap, noting that the Commodity Exchange Act “neither expressly nor impliedly preempts Ohio’s or Tennessee’s gambling laws.” The decision affirmed the Southern District of Ohio’s denial of a preliminary injunction motion from Kalshi and vacates the Middle District of Tennessee’s entry of a preliminary injunction.

A Ninth Circuit ruling this past August unanimously affirmed U.S. District Judge Andrew Gordon’s April 2025 decision to dissolve an approved Kalshi injunction against Nevada, allowing the Nevada Gaming Control Board to uphold its state gambling laws against sports event contracts.

The three-judge panel voted 3-0 to affirm Judge Gordon’s decision, noting that it disagreed with Kalshi’s overly broad reading of the CEA and ruled that its sports event contracts are likely sports bets.

The league urged the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari now to provide clarity before the next NFL season. Billions of dollars will be bet on NFL games through prediction markets next season, the league wrote, and any delay from the court will result in increasing consumer harm and risk to game integrity.

“If the Court agrees with the Sixth and Ninth Circuits that sports wagering on DCMs is not subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commission, but rather is to be overseen by traditional state regulators, then the full panoply of state regulatory protections will apply to DCMs, thus reassuring the NFL and others concerned about game integrity and responsible gambling. By contrast, if the Court were to agree with the Third Circuit and conclude that the Commission is in fact the exclusive regulator of sports wagering on DCMs, then the NFL (and other concerned entities) could redouble their efforts this year to persuade the Commission, DCMs, and Congress to adopt more robust integrity and consumer protection measures before the 2027 NFL season begins,” counsel wrote.