Is Kalshi legal in all states? No. As of September 11, 2026, Kalshi operates nationwide as a CFTC-regulated exchange, but its sports contracts are restricted or contested in 18 states. Iowa joined the map on September 8. The map split on August 28, when a unanimous Ninth Circuit panel ruled that the substance of Kalshi's sports contracts "is sports gambling, regardless of whether Kalshi calls them swaps," the opposite of what the Third Circuit had said in April. On September 2, New Jersey asked the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve that split, and the Court docketed the petition on September 8 as No. 26-299. The state-by-state map, and what moved this week, is below.
Stay ahead of the markets.
Daily insights and expert picks on Kalshi, Polymarket, and what's moving markets.
Free forever. Unsubscribe anytime.
Which States Are Contested?
Every row was verified against primary reporting and court records on August 31, 2026; the New Jersey, Michigan, Massachusetts, and Washington entries were re-verified on September 4, 2026, and the New Jersey, Nevada, Utah, Iowa, Montana, Connecticut, Maryland, Tennessee, Ohio, Massachusetts, and Washington entries on September 11, 2026. Where Kalshi is the plaintiff, the company sued the state's regulator to block enforcement; where the state is the plaintiff, the state moved first. This is the map of where the fight is. What your app shows today can differ.
| State | Case | Court | Docket | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nevada | KalshiEX, LLC v. Hendrick (v. Assad on appeal) | D. Nev. | 2:25-cv-00575 | Kalshi's injunction dissolved; case continues |
| Nevada (Appeal) | KalshiEX, LLC v. Assad — decided Aug 28, 2026 | 9th Cir. | 25-7516 | Kalshi lost, 3-0; election issue remanded; Kalshi petitioned for rehearing en banc Sept 9, 2026 (deadline was Sept 12) |
| New Jersey | KalshiEX, LLC v. Flaherty | D.N.J. | 1:25-cv-02152 | Injunction protects Kalshi; merits ongoing |
| New Jersey (Appeal) | Kalshiex LLC v. Flaherty — decided Apr 6, 2026 | 3d Cir. | 25-1922 | Kalshi won at the preliminary stage, 2-1 |
| New Jersey (Supreme Court) | Flaherty v. KalshiEX, LLC — petition filed Sept 2, 2026 | U.S. Sup. Ct. | 26-299 | Docketed Sept 8, 2026; asks the Court to review the Third Circuit loss; Kalshi's response due Oct 8, 2026 |
| Maryland | Kalshiex LLC v. Martin | D. Md. | 1:25-cv-01283 | On appeal; state paused enforcement |
| Maryland (Appeal) | Kalshiex LLC v. Martin | 4th Cir. | 25-1892 | Argued May 7, 2026; decision pending |
| New York | KalshiEX LLC v. Williams | S.D.N.Y. | 1:25-cv-08846 | Live |
| New York (Appeal) | KalshiEX LLC v. Williams | 2d Cir. | 26-1835 | Pending |
| New York (State Suit) | People of the State of New York v. KalshiEX LLC | S.D.N.Y. | 1:26-cv-06550 | Filed Jul 31; CFTC's Aug 11 emergency order directs Kalshi to keep operating |
| Connecticut | Kalshi suit vs. state consumer-protection officials (filed Dec 3, 2025) | D. Conn. | — | Kalshi's injunction denied Aug 10; on appeal to 2d Cir. |
| Connecticut (State Suit) | State of Connecticut v. KalshiEX LLC | Conn. Super. Ct. (Hartford) | — | Filed Aug 26; state's ex parte TRO denied same day; return date Sept 15, 2026 |
| Michigan | Michigan AG / Gaming Control Board v. Kalshi | Ingham Cty. Cir. Ct. | — | Preliminary injunction signed Sept 1, 2026 (TRO since Jun 29); sports boards dark; $500,000 per day for missing the geofence |
| Massachusetts | Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Kalshi | Suffolk Cty. Super. Ct. | 2584CV02525 | Preliminary injunction Jan 20, 2026; stayed since February pending appeal |
| Massachusetts (Appeal) | Commonwealth v. Kalshi | Mass. SJC | — | Argued early May 2026; decision pending |
| Utah | KalshiEx LLC v. Cox | D. Utah | 2:26-cv-00151 | Kalshi lost Aug 4, 2026; on appeal to the 10th Cir. |
| Utah (Appeal) | KalshiEx LLC v. Cox | 10th Cir. | — | Kalshi's emergency motion for an injunction pending appeal denied Sept 8, 2026; Utah may enforce while the appeal runs |
| Iowa | KalshiEX LLC v. Bird | S.D. Iowa | 4:26-cv-00109 | Kalshi's injunction denied Sept 8, 2026; state may enforce |
| Arizona | KalshiEX LLC v. Johnson | D. Ariz. | 2:26-cv-01715 | Live, inside the Ninth Circuit |
| Washington | State of Washington v. KalshiEX LLC | King County Super. Ct. | 26-2-10264-3 SEA | Order in force; Sept 2 geofence deadline |
| Montana | KalshiEX LLC v. Knudsen | D. Mont. | 6:26-cv-00028 | Kalshi's injunction denied Aug 27, 2026; live, inside the Ninth Circuit |
| Minnesota | United States v. State of Minnesota | D. Minn. | 0:26-cv-02661 | Platform-ban statute enjoined, on hold |
| New Mexico | State of New Mexico v. Kalshi, Inc. | D.N.M. | 6:26-cv-01857 | Live |
| New Mexico (Federal Suit) | United States of America v. State of New Mexico | D.N.M. | 1:26-cv-01912 | Live |
| Kentucky | Commonwealth of Kentucky v. KalshiEX LLC | E.D. Ky. | 3:26-cv-00048 | Live |
| Kentucky (Federal Suit) | USA v. Commonwealth of Kentucky | E.D. Ky. | 3:26-cv-00049 | Live |
| Ohio | Kalshiex LLC v. Schuler | S.D. Ohio | 2:25-cv-01165 | Kalshi's injunction denied Mar 9; on consolidated 6th Cir. appeal |
| Illinois | KalshiEX LLC v. Raoul | N.D. Ill. | 1:26-cv-07363 | Live |
| Tennessee | KalshiEX LLC v. Orgel | M.D. Tenn. | 3:26-cv-00034 | Feb 2026 injunction favored Kalshi |
| Tennessee (Appeal) | KalshiEX LLC v. Orgel — consolidated with Ohio | 6th Cir. | 26-5235 | Argued Jul 30, 2026; decision pending |
What Moved Since September 8
Five moves in two days: a docketing, two orders, and two petitions, none of them a final answer. Here is the week, in the order it landed, with the one line each item changes on the map above.
- September 8, Supreme Court. The clerk docketed New Jersey's petition as Flaherty v. KalshiEX, LLC, No. 26-299, and set Kalshi's response for October 8, 2026. October 8 is the date that matters. Kalshi's brief in opposition is due then, extensions are routine, and the justices do not consider a petition until that briefing closes, so nothing moves at the Supreme Court before then. The circuit and state courts on this map keep ruling in the meantime.
- September 8, Tenth Circuit. The appeals court denied Kalshi's emergency motion for an injunction pending its Utah appeal: "Kalshi has not shown these factors weigh in its favor. Accordingly, we deny its motion." Kalshi's August 4 loss in Utah now stands with no shield while the appeal is briefed, which puts Utah alongside Nevada, Iowa, and Montana: the state may enforce while the case runs.
- September 8, Iowa. The 18th state. Judge Stephen Locher of the Southern District of Iowa denied Kalshi's injunction against Attorney General Brenna Bird and the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission in KalshiEX LLC v. Bird, 4:26-cv-00109, a suit Kalshi filed in March after a meeting with Bird produced no promise not to enforce. Locher wrote: "It is simply not reasonable to conclude that Congress implicitly intended to foreclose state regulation in the entire field of sports gambling when it passed a law that had nothing to do with gambling," and that following each state's rules "may be inconvenient for Kalshi, but it is not impossible." Iowa sits in the Eighth Circuit, which has no Kalshi ruling, so this is a district-level loss with the state free to act.
- September 9, Ninth Circuit. Kalshi has not gone to the Supreme Court from its Nevada loss. It asked an 11-judge en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit to rehear the case, three days ahead of the September 12 deadline. The petition argues the panel's reasoning "is at war with itself" because it called the contracts something other than swaps while still applying the CFTC's own event-contract rule to them. In Kalshi's words: "Either Kalshi's contracts are tradable instruments under the CFTC's exclusive regulatory jurisdiction or they are not." Rehearing is a long shot by the numbers. Prediction News counted 11 en banc grants out of 730 petitions in the Ninth Circuit's 2025 fiscal year.
- September 9, Supreme Court Again. Robinhood, whose Nevada appeal was decided in the same August 28 opinion as Kalshi's and Crypto.com's, filed its own petition for certiorari the same day. The Court now has two petitions from opposite sides of the split, New Jersey's from the Third Circuit and Robinhood's from the Ninth, and Kalshi can still add a third if the en banc request fails.
- August 27, Montana, A Catch-Up. Our August 31 verification listed Montana as simply live, which missed a ruling: Judge Donald Molloy had denied Kalshi's injunction on August 27, finding no irreparable harm because "Kalshi's repeated agreement to stay this matter for months at a time fatally undermines its ability to make such a showing on the current record here," and ordered the state to answer the complaint within three weeks, with no extensions. The row above is corrected.
What did not move matters as much. The Fourth Circuit (Maryland), the Sixth Circuit (Tennessee and Ohio), and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court had not ruled as of September 11, neither Washington nor Kalshi had said publicly whether the full geofence landed, and Connecticut's state suit has its first return date on September 15. Every order added this week still runs against Kalshi, not the trader, the same pattern as every row before it.
If your state is not in the table, nothing has changed in your app. But the answer there still depends on which federal circuit you live in, and that is the part of the map that moved in August.
Why Your Federal Circuit Now Decides
Kalshi holds one federal license. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission regulates it as a Designated Contract Market, the same category of license futures exchanges hold, which is why event contracts exist at all: they are derivatives on real-world outcomes traded on an order book under federal rules. Kalshi's argument in every state case is that this one license preempts state gambling law, which is licensed book by book. We keep the two frameworks side by side in are prediction markets legal.
Two federal appeals courts have now tested that argument and come back with opposite answers. An appellate ruling binds the federal courts in every state of its circuit, so the map now sorts by geography:
- Ninth Circuit (Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington): Kalshi's federal shield was rejected on August 28. Each state may enforce its own gambling laws if its regulators act. Nevada, Arizona, and Montana have live cases (Montana's judge denied Kalshi an injunction on August 27), Washington has a state-court order in force, and Kalshi asked an 11-judge en banc panel to rehear the Nevada case on September 9; California, Oregon, Alaska, Hawaii, and Idaho have no case yet, so nothing changes there until a regulator moves.
- Third Circuit (Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania): pro-Kalshi precedent. The injunction affirmed on April 6 protects Kalshi in New Jersey, and New Jersey took it to the Supreme Court on September 2.
- Sixth Circuit (Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee): the consolidated Tennessee and Ohio appeal was argued July 30 and is undecided. Michigan's sports boards are separately dark under a state-court injunction.
- Fourth Circuit (Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia): Maryland's appeal was argued May 7 and is undecided; Maryland is holding enforcement until it rules.
- Second Circuit (Connecticut, New York, Vermont): both appeals pending. A Connecticut district judge has already ruled the contracts "at bottom … are sports wagers."
- No Federal Appellate Ruling Yet: Massachusetts (state-court injunction stayed while the state's highest court decides), plus Illinois, Minnesota, Iowa, and New Mexico, where the fights are district-level; Iowa joined that list on September 8. Utah is at the Tenth Circuit, which denied Kalshi an injunction pending appeal on September 8 but has not ruled on the merits.
Any of the four undecided circuits could deepen the split or start resolving it.
What The Ninth Circuit Decided On August 28
On Friday, August 28, 2026, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel decided Kalshi's Nevada appeal and ruled 3-0 against the exchange. It largely affirmed the district-court order that had dissolved the preliminary injunction shielding Kalshi from Nevada's gaming regulators. Judge Ryan Nelson, writing for the panel, put the holding in one sentence: "the substance of the sports event contracts offered on Kalshi's DCM is sports gambling, regardless of whether Kalshi calls them swaps." The court held Kalshi had not shown the Commodity Exchange Act likely preempts state gaming regulation for its sports contracts, because the products likely are not swaps under federal law at all. Judge Kenneth Lee added a separate concurrence. We walked through the gambling-or-trading question in is Kalshi gambling; the Ninth Circuit just answered it, for its nine states, in the state's favor.
Two limits keep the ruling in proportion. It is a preliminary decision about likelihood of success, so the Nevada case continues toward a final judgment. And it covers sports contracts only; the panel sent the election-contracts question back to the district court. Kalshi's response, via spokesperson Dani Lever: "Despite the Ninth Circuit's opinion, we still believe the CFTC regulations as written do not prohibit sports contracts, and in any event, the CFTC is working to clarify those regulations." On September 9, Kalshi asked a larger en banc Ninth Circuit panel to rehear the case rather than petition the Supreme Court itself; Robinhood, decided in the same opinion, petitioned the Supreme Court the same day.
Will The Supreme Court Settle It?
The other pole of the split is New Jersey. On April 6, 2026, a divided Third Circuit panel affirmed Kalshi's injunction against the state's gaming regulators, holding Kalshi showed a reasonable likelihood of success on preemption. Judge David Porter wrote the majority, joined by Chief Judge Michael Chagares. Judge Jane Roth dissented, writing that the products are "virtually indistinguishable from betting products available on online sportsbooks." That injunction is why Kalshi's sports boards still trade in New Jersey, and it serves as pro-Kalshi precedent in Pennsylvania and Delaware if either state moves.
New Jersey skipped a rehearing request and went to Justice Samuel Alito for more time, twice. On July 1 he extended the filing deadline to August 4, and on July 24 he extended it again to September 3, after the state told him pending Fourth or Ninth Circuit rulings "would inform both the petition and this Court as to the presence of a split." Kalshi did not oppose. The Ninth Circuit delivered that split on August 28. On Wednesday, September 2, one day before the deadline, Attorney General Jennifer Davenport and interim gaming-enforcement director Mary Jo Flaherty filed a 332-page petition for certiorari, Flaherty v. KalshiEX, LLC, reported by Reuters the same day.
The question presented is one sentence: "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." The petition cites the Ninth Circuit's opinion by name, calls the disagreement "a direct, acknowledged, and irreconcilable split," and says Kalshi's position "has already drawn opposition from 44 States, hundreds of Tribes, casinos, public officials, and more." Davenport: "These companies have no right to offer their sports bets without following state law, which is why dozens of states across the ideological spectrum have opposed them." The Court docketed the petition on September 8 as No. 26-299. Kalshi says it "will be seeking further review," and the CFTC's spokesperson said the Ninth Circuit "misread the statute" and "teed up a circuit split that calls out for resolution by the Supreme Court." The state that lost and the federal regulator on the other side both want the Court to take the case. Robinhood filed a second petition from the Ninth Circuit side on September 9, and Kalshi can add a third from its own Ninth Circuit loss.
What A Grant Would And Would Not Change
A petition is a request, and the Court's calendar runs slower than any docket on this map. Kalshi's brief in opposition is due October 8, extensions are routine, and the justices vote at private conferences, so the earliest realistic answer on whether they will hear the case is late fall. A grant by roughly mid-January, the Court's customary cutoff, would put argument in October Term 2026 with a decision by the end of June 2027. A later grant pushes argument to the following term. The last time New Jersey carried a sports-betting fight up from the Third Circuit, the PASPA case, the petition filed October 7, 2016 was not granted until June 27, 2017, and the decision came in May 2018.
Neither the filing nor a grant moves a line on the map by itself. The Third Circuit's injunction stays in force, so Kalshi's sports boards stay open in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware through the entire term unless the justices reverse. Nevada keeps its August 28 win. Michigan, Massachusetts, and Connecticut run on state-court tracks that a grant does not pause. What a grant changes is the clock: the Sixth, Fourth, Second, and Tenth Circuit panels may hold their decisions, and states may hold enforcement the way Maryland already has. A denial freezes the map in its current shape, two circuits with opposite law and the state-by-state grind as the permanent operating reality.
What Each Contested State Has Ordered
Nevada
Nevada moved first, in March 2025, and after August 28 Kalshi has no federal shield against its gaming regulators. On a separate state-court track in Carson City, a judge ordered Kalshi in May to geofence its sports, election, and entertainment contracts away from anyone in Nevada by August 12. The Gaming Control Board said in late July that Kalshi would deploy a GeoComply solution to meet it. Then, in an August filing, the board told the court its own investigators had placed nine trades on the app from inside Nevada the day after the deadline, and asked the judge to hold Kalshi in contempt and fine it $120,000 per day. Kalshi disputes the claim, calling the state's tactics an abuse of state power, and says its sports, entertainment, and election boards are blocked for Nevada users.
Washington
Washington won the map's first order in force under its own consumer-protection and gambling law, before the Ninth Circuit ruled. On August 13, 2026, King County Superior Court Judge John McHale ordered Kalshi to stop offering event contracts tied to sports, elections, politics, entertainment, culture, technology, science, and "mentions" markets to Washington users. The order set an IP address- and residency-based geofence by August 19, which Kalshi met, and a full multi-source geofence by September 2, backed by reported fines of $120,000 per day, with an affidavit route for explaining any delay. Kalshi hired former U.S. Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal and asked both the trial court and the Washington Court of Appeals to pause the order while it appeals. Both said no. The deadline passed with the order in force. As of this page's September 11 re-verification, neither side had said publicly whether the full geofence landed on time.
The order is category-level. Commodities, climate, economics, and finance contracts may continue, and users may close out positions they already hold in the restricted categories, though the order puts no date on that exit right. If you are still holding one in Washington, test the exit now rather than assume it.
New York
New York is the one state where the federal regulator itself intervened. Kalshi sued state officials in October 2025 and took that fight to the Second Circuit in July 2026. On July 31, the New York Attorney General sued Kalshi, seeking a restraining order that would have barred all of Kalshi's event contracts nationwide, plus more than $36 billion in damages; Kalshi moved the case to federal court the same day. After a federal judge turned away the CFTC's first attempt to block the state's case, the agency invoked its Section 8a(9) emergency authority on August 11, a power reporting counts as used only six times before this year and dormant since 1980, and ordered Kalshi to keep operating. CFTC Chairman Michael Selig called a sudden shutdown of a federally registered exchange an existential threat to the agency's authority. A New York trader is trading, for now, under that order while the litigation proceeds. Whether the order is a trump card is already in doubt: a Connecticut federal judge ruled two days later that it "did not materially change his earlier analysis."
Connecticut
Connecticut's Department of Consumer Protection ordered Kalshi to stop offering what it called unlicensed sports wagering in December 2025, and Kalshi sued to block enforcement. U.S. District Judge Vernon Oliver denied Kalshi's preliminary injunction on August 10, 2026, writing of the contracts that "at bottom, they are sports wagers," and denied a renewed emergency motion three days later, after the CFTC's order landed. Kalshi appealed to the Second Circuit, and state enforcement may proceed meanwhile. On August 26, Attorney General William Tong sued Kalshi in Connecticut Superior Court to shut down its sports contracts; the court denied an immediate ex parte restraining order the same day, leaving the injunction question for a full hearing. No order is in force in Connecticut today.
Is Kalshi Legal In Michigan? Not For Sports Contracts
Michigan is where a state order first actually bit. On June 29, 2026, an Ingham County Circuit Court judge signed a restraining order barring Kalshi from offering or advertising sports contracts to anyone in Michigan, with third-party geolocation required and $120,000 per day on the table, and Kalshi's sports boards have been dark there since midsummer. On September 1, Judge Rosemarie Aquilina converted that order into a preliminary injunction that runs until final judgment. It raises the penalty to $500,000 for each day Kalshi fails to geolocate through a provider licensed by the Michigan Gaming Control Board and extends the ban to deposits, account creation, and advertising, calling the operation a "sports betting operation masquerading as an investment opportunity." When Kalshi filed an emergency rule in July to unwind existing Michigan positions, the CFTC stayed the rule and directed Kalshi to honor the trades instead, the rehearsal for what the agency did in New York a month later.
Massachusetts And Maryland
Massachusetts has had an order on the books since winter. Attorney General Andrea Campbell sued in September 2025, and Suffolk Superior Court Judge Christopher Barry-Smith enjoined the sports contracts on January 20, 2026. The order has been stayed since February while the Supreme Judicial Court decides Kalshi's appeal, argued in early May, where the justices asked how the contracts differ "from what would colloquially be known as a bet." A ruling for the state lifts the stay.
Maryland agreed not to enforce until the Fourth Circuit rules. At the May 7 argument one judge remarked, "If it quacks, you know, it's a duck. Right? It's gambling isn't it?" Baltimore complicated the truce on August 13 by filing its own consumer-protection suits against Kalshi and Polymarket in city court.
Is Kalshi Legal In Utah? Not While The Appeal Runs
Utah is a month-old loss that has already reached an appeals court. On August 4, 2026, U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby ruled that federal law does not preempt Utah's anti-gambling statutes as applied to Kalshi's sports contracts. Governor Spencer Cox's response: "Prediction markets are gambling, full stop." Kalshi appealed to the Tenth Circuit, which on September 8 denied its emergency motion for an injunction pending appeal, so Utah may enforce while the appeal is briefed.
Minnesota, Iowa And The Rest
Minnesota's SF 4760, a statute that bans event-contract platforms outright, was preliminarily enjoined on July 27, 2026 and remains on hold while the federal challenge proceeds. Iowa became the newest district-court loss on September 8, when Judge Stephen Locher denied Kalshi's injunction against the state's attorney general and gaming commission. Montana's Judge Donald Molloy denied Kalshi an injunction on August 27. Kentucky and New Mexico each carry a state suit against Kalshi and a federal suit against the state, all live and none decided. One point holds across the whole map: every order on this page runs against Kalshi, and none of them makes the individual trader a target.
Does Any Of This Touch Non-Sports Contracts?
Barely. The Third Circuit's opinion, the Ninth Circuit's ruling, and New Jersey's Supreme Court question are all framed around sports contracts, and the Ninth Circuit sent election contracts back for separate analysis. Even Washington's order, the broadest single-state restriction in force, leaves commodities, climate, economics, and finance running. When the next ruling lands, the sports boards, plus elections and politics where an order reaches them, are the piece that appears, disappears, or gets geofenced state by state. Our Kalshi sports review covers what the sports product is when you have access to it.
How Old Do You Have To Be?
You must be 18 or older under Kalshi's own eligibility rules, with document verification if requested. That is three years below the 21+ standard most state-licensed sportsbooks use. The age floor and the state map above are separate gates: being 18 in Michigan does not open the sports board there, and a state with no case on the map does not lower the age. Sign-up collects personal information because Kalshi must verify the identity of anyone opening an account under U.S. law and CFTC rules. Internationally, restricted jurisdictions are listed in Kalshi's Member Agreement, and funding abroad runs on debit, wire, and crypto, with no ACH, PayPal, or Venmo.
What If You Travel, Move, Or Use A VPN?
Availability follows where you are, and the exchange is legally required to know where that is. Kalshi's terms make it your responsibility to ensure your use is lawful where you stand. Routing around a state restriction with a VPN puts your account, and any balance in it, on the wrong side of the verification rules the exchange must enforce. If you move, open the app in the new location and let it tell you what it offers. Two states change the answer at the door rather than at the sports board: Michigan's injunction bars new accounts and deposits outright, and Washington lets you close a restricted-category position but puts no date on that right.
How To Check Your State Today
This is the part of the page that will not go stale, and it takes about 2 minutes.
- Open the app or site where you are. Kalshi's catalog is location-aware; a restricted product simply will not be offered. Washington and Michigan are the live demonstrations, and in Nevada, Utah, Iowa, Montana, and Connecticut, where courts have refused to block state enforcement, a sports board can go dark without notice, so check before every session rather than once.
- Read the market's rules pane before trading. Every contract states how it settles, who the settlement source is, and when it resolves. If your access to a market changed, the app is where that shows up first.
- Check Kalshi's regulatory page. Kalshi points users to its regulatory hub for filings and current status, and that page is the definitive list on any given day.
- Treat any third-party state list, including this one, as dated the moment it publishes. That is why every claim above carries a docket number and an as-of date instead of a green checkmark.
We ran the same exercise for the other big exchange in is Polymarket legal in the US.
The Bottom Line
The federal answer is stable and the state answer moves. Kalshi's sports contracts have lost the federal shield in the nine Ninth Circuit states, keep it in the three Third Circuit states, and wait on the Sixth, Fourth, Second, and Tenth. Michigan is dark, Washington's order is in force, Utah and Iowa may enforce as of September 8, and New York trades under an emergency order from Kalshi's own regulator. Whether the Supreme Court takes the New Jersey case, now docketed as No. 26-299, will not be known before late fall. Open the app where you stand for today's answer.
More on this: CPI Report Odds: Where Inflation Is Priced · Where Prediction Markets Are Sharp, And Where They Are Soft · Giants Win Total 2026: A 4-13 Team Priced For 7.5 Wins · Tua Tagovailoa's Falcons Job, As Priced By A Market · US Open Exacta Odds: 53 Of The 80 Pairs Are Already Dead
Hottest Prediction Markets Right Now
- 2028 Democratic presidential nominee · $166M traded
- 2027 Pro Football Champion · $52M traded
- Pro Baseball Champion · $41M traded
- Bitcoin price at the end of 2026 · $30M traded
- 2027 Pro Basketball Champion · $19M traded
Every market above links to our full AI model verdict; browse them all on the OddsShopper prediction markets hub.
Event contracts involve risk and are not appropriate for everyone. Availability varies by state and over time; docket statuses cited were verified against primary reporting and court records on August 31, 2026, with the New Jersey, Michigan, Massachusetts, and Washington entries re-verified on September 4, 2026, and the New Jersey, Nevada, Utah, Iowa, Montana, Connecticut, Maryland, Tennessee, Ohio, Massachusetts, and Washington entries re-verified on September 11, 2026. Trade responsibly.
If you also trade on the Polymarket US App, code OS4 gets new users a $50 trading bonus on a $10 deposit — affiliate link; we may earn a commission; terms as stated by Polymarket. 18+ Only. Restrictions and eligibility requirements apply. Not available in all jurisdictions. Trading is risky. 100% loss can occur. See polymarket.com/tos for more information. The Polymarket US App serves as an independent software provider and affiliate of Polymarket US and Polymarket Clearing, the CFTC-regulated exchange and clearing organization.
