Michigan Judge Blocks Kalshi for 14 Days in Sports Betting Clash
2h ago|4 min readStandard
Fazen Markets Editorial Desk
Collective editorial team · methodology
kalshiprediction-markets
Fazen Markets Editorial Desk
Collective editorial team · methodology
Trades XAUUSD 24/5 on autopilot. Verified Myfxbook performance. Free forever.
Risk warning: CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. The majority of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs. Vortex HFT is informational software — not investment advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
A Michigan circuit court judge issued a 14-day temporary restraining order against prediction market platform Kalshi on June 30, 2026. The order immediately blocks the company from offering or settling any contracts related to sports events within the state. This legal action, reported by The Block, represents a significant escalation in a long-running jurisdictional dispute between the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and state regulators. The ruling prevents Michigan residents from accessing a market that has seen growing institutional interest, with Kalshi's parent company reporting over $150 million in total trading volume since its 2021 launch.
The legal conflict over prediction markets is not new. In April 2025, the CFTC approved Kalshi's political event contracts, overruling objections from five separate state regulators. That approval was a landmark decision that established the CFTC's view of these contracts as valid swaps under its purview. The current financial backdrop is defined by elevated short-term interest rates, with the Fed's policy rate at 4.50%, creating a search for uncorrelated, event-driven returns among some allocators.
The Michigan Attorney General's office triggered the current event by filing a motion for a temporary restraining order. State authorities argue that Kalshi's sports-related contracts constitute illegal gambling under Michigan law, specifically the Lawful Internet Gaming Act of 2019. The catalyst chain stems from Kalshi’s expansion of its sportsbook offerings following its political markets success, directly challenging state-controlled gambling monopolies and their associated tax revenue streams.
The 14-day restraining order is a specific, time-bound legal instrument. Kalshi's platform has facilitated roughly $28 million in total sports-related contract volume since introducing the product category. This volume represents approximately 18% of Kalshi's cumulative $150 million in all-market trading. For comparison, the legal U.S. sports betting market handled over $120 billion in wagers in 2025, according to the American Gaming Association.
A comparison of regulatory fines shows the stakes. State fines for unlicensed gambling operations can reach $100,000 per violation in Michigan. In contrast, the maximum civil monetary penalty the CFTC can levy for violations of the Commodity Exchange Act is $1,000,000 per violation. The Michigan lottery generated $1.6 billion in revenue for the state's School Aid Fund in fiscal year 2025, highlighting the economic interests at play.
The immediate second-order effect is negative for private market valuations of prediction market platforms. Kalshi, which raised a $30 million Series B round in 2023 at a reported valuation near $400 million, faces increased regulatory risk that could pressure future funding rounds. Legal sportsbook operators like DraftKings (DKNG) and FanDuel parent Flutter Entertainment (FLUT) may see a near-term benefit by facing less competition for user attention and capital. A successful state challenge could solidify their regulatory moat, though the impact on their multi-billion dollar market caps would likely be marginal, perhaps 1-3% on positive legal developments.
A key limitation is that this ruling is temporary and applies only to one state. It does not invalidate the CFTC's broader regulatory approval. The primary counter-argument asserts prediction markets are financial instruments for hedging risk, not gambling, a view the CFTC has endorsed. Positioning data shows institutional money has been slowly entering the prediction market space, with some hedge funds using contracts to hedge event risk. Flow is now likely paused pending further legal clarity, with capital waiting on the sidelines.
The primary catalyst is the hearing set for July 14, 2026, where the Michigan court will decide whether to convert the temporary restraining order into a preliminary injunction. A second catalyst is potential intervention from the CFTC, which could file an amicus brief asserting federal preemption under the Commodity Exchange Act. The outcome of a separate, pending case in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit regarding CFTC authority over similar products could also influence proceedings later in Q3 2026.
Key levels to watch include the number of states filing similar motions, which would signal a coordinated challenge. Monitoring the trading volume on Kalshi for non-sports political and economic contracts will indicate whether the legal overhang is spreading to other product categories. If the injunction is made permanent, it would establish a direct legal precedent for other states to follow, potentially fracturing the national market.
Retail investors cannot directly trade Kalshi contracts, but the ruling impacts publicly traded companies in the adjacent gaming and brokerage sectors. The legal uncertainty may temporarily depress sentiment for fintech and special purpose acquisition companies targeting similar disruptive financial models. Investors in state lottery bonds or municipal securities reliant on gambling revenue should monitor the case, as a shift toward prediction markets could threaten long-term tax receipts for some jurisdictions.
The legal battle mirrors the early 2010s conflict over daily fantasy sports platforms like DraftKings and FanDuel, which were initially deemed games of skill rather than chance. Those companies faced litigation and cease-and-desist orders in several states before most legislatures passed explicit laws legalizing and regulating them. A key difference is that prediction markets have an explicit federal regulator in the CFTC, which fantasy sports lacked, potentially leading to a faster but more binary resolution at the federal level.
Historically, states have had limited success in directly overturning CFTC determinations on product legality. A notable precedent is the 2018 case of Monex vs. CFTC, where the courts upheld the agency’s broad anti-fraud authority. However, states frequently win on consumer protection and licensing grounds within their borders. The last major jurisdictional clash involved crypto assets, resulting in a dual-regulatory system where the CFTC oversees derivatives and states enforce money transmission laws.
Michigan's aggressive legal move tests the limits of federal regulatory authority over novel financial contracts, with immediate consequences for prediction market expansion.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. CFD trading carries high risk of capital loss.
Vortex HFT is our free MT4/MT5 Expert Advisor. Verified Myfxbook performance. No subscription. No fees. Trades 24/5.
Position yourself for the macro moves discussed above
Start TradingSponsored
Open a demo account in 30 seconds. No deposit required.
CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money.