Could the Fight Over Sports Betting Change American Sports Forever?

The NFL spent years fighting sports betting. Then it spent years profiting from it. Now, it’s asking the Supreme Court to decide who gets to regulate the fastest-growing segment of the gambling market — and the answer could reshape the entire sports landscape.

On October 8, 2026, the National Football League filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, backing New Jersey’s request for review of a legal dispute over prediction markets. The case pits the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) — the federal agency that regulates financial derivatives — against state gambling regulators. And the NFL has picked a side that puts it at odds with the Trump administration.

The league’s argument is straightforward: prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket are offering sports gambling, not financial products, and they should be subject to the same state regulations as traditional sportsbooks. The implications for American sports — and for the billions of dollars flowing through these platforms — are enormous.

What Are Prediction Markets, and Why Are They at the Center of a Legal Firestorm?

Prediction markets allow users to buy and sell contracts tied to the outcome of real-world events — elections, economic indicators, weather, and, increasingly, sports. On Kalshi and Polymarket, you can bet on whether a kicker will miss a field goal, whether a player will be injured, or whether the first play of a game will be a run or a pass.

The companies behind these platforms argue that what they offer are “swaps” — financial instruments regulated by the CFTC under federal law. States, by contrast, view these contracts as gambling and contend that they fall under their jurisdiction.

The legal landscape is a mess. In April 2026, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Kalshi’s favor, holding that New Jersey’s gambling laws are preempted by federal regulation. But in September 2026, the Sixth Circuit ruled against Kalshi, finding that Ohio and Tennessee can regulate its event contracts under state gambling laws. The Ninth Circuit has also sided with states. The result is a split among federal appeals courts — exactly the kind of conflict the Supreme Court exists to resolve.

The NFL’s Argument: “We Know Gambling When We See It”

The NFL’s brief is blunt. “Prediction markets are overwhelmingly used for consumer sports gambling,” the league wrote. And the numbers back it up.

On the first Sunday of the 2026 NFL season, prediction markets recorded $3.3 billion in trading volume** — and **$1.8 billion of that was tied to NFL games. More than half of all trading volume on those platforms was NFL-related.

The league argues that the CFTC’s “laissez-faire approach” toward prediction markets “threatens game integrity” and could allow “unscrupulous actors to cause mischief, trade on inside information, and harm game integrity”. It points out that the CFTC has declined to adopt safeguards that the NFL has requested, including:

• A list of prohibited wagers that could threaten game integrity

• Restrictions on bets susceptible to manipulation

• Protections against betting by insiders

• A minimum age of 21 for betting, rather than the current 18

“Neither the CFTC nor the prediction market companies themselves — despite our persistent urging — have banned categories of bets susceptible to manipulation or set a 21 age limit,” an NFL spokesperson told Reuters.

The league also questions whether the CFTC has the resources or staff to adequately regulate sports betting at the scale these platforms now operate.

The Opposition: Kalshi, Polymarket, and the Trump Administration

Kalshi and Polymarket reject the NFL’s characterization. Kalshi argues that its “top priority is the integrity of its markets” and that the CFTC is “actively policing sports-related markets”. Polymarket says it has built advanced surveillance tools and is working with federal regulators to develop a framework that would be stronger than state laws.

The Trump administration has sided with the prediction markets. The CFTC has weighed in on the dispute in favor of Kalshi, bringing lawsuits against states that have moved to enforce their gambling laws. The administration’s position is that prediction markets should be governed by the federal government alone.

The CFTC itself has pushed back on the NFL’s claims. In a statement to Reuters, the agency said it had engaged with the NFL from the beginning and that “it’s unfortunate the NFL declined to sign an MOU with the CFTC which would’ve provided the league the ability to better discuss, cooperate, and exchange information with us to promote the integrity and resilience of prediction markets”.

The Broader Context: A Post-2018 Gambling Boom

To understand how we got here, you have to go back to 2018, when the Supreme Court struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) in Murphy v. NCAA. The decision, which held that PASPA unconstitutionally “commandeered” state legislatures, opened the floodgates for legal sports betting across the country.

Since then, more than 30 states have legalized sports betting. The NFL, which had spent years fighting legalization, pivoted to embracing it — partnering with sportsbooks and integrating gambling content into its broadcasts. The league now generates significant revenue from gambling-related advertising and partnerships.

But the rise of prediction markets has created a new problem. These platforms operate in all 50 states, even those where gambling is illegal, because they claim federal regulation preempts state law. That has infuriated state regulators and created the legal conflict now before the Supreme Court.

The NFL’s position is, in part, self-interested. The league wants to protect the integrity of its games — but it also wants to ensure that any betting on its games is subject to the same rigorous oversight as traditional sportsbooks, where it has established relationships and safeguards. The league has a financial stake in keeping prediction markets under state control.

The Implications: What’s at Stake?

If the Supreme Court takes the case — and legal experts expect it to, given the circuit split — the outcome could reshape American sports betting.

If states win: Prediction markets would be subject to a patchwork of state gambling laws, potentially forcing Kalshi and Polymarket to restrict or shut down sports-related contracts in states that ban them. The NFL would get the robust safeguards it’s asking for. But the platforms argue this would be unworkable — “markets can’t operate when the rules change at every state line,” Kalshi spokesperson Dani Lever told Reuters.

If the platforms win: Prediction markets would remain under federal regulation, operating nationwide with uniform rules. The NFL’s integrity concerns would go largely unaddressed unless the CFTC implements new safeguards. The league has warned that “any delay from the Court will result in increasing consumer harm and risk to game integrity”.

Either way, the decision will have profound implications for how Americans bet on sports — and for how much control the NFL has over the gambling ecosystem built around its product.

The NFL has spent

years navigating the post-2018 gambling landscape, embracing the revenue it brings while trying to manage the risks. Now, it’s asking the Supreme Court to draw a line: prediction markets are gambling, and gambling is regulated by the states.

The case is a collision of two powerful forces: the federal government’s authority over financial markets, and the states’ traditional role in regulating gambling. The outcome will determine not just who regulates prediction markets, but whether the NFL — and other sports leagues — can enforce the integrity safeguards they say are essential to protecting their games.

The Supreme Court is not expected to decide whether to take the case until December at the earliest. Kalshi has until November 9 to respond. But the NFL has made its position clear: it wants a ruling before the season ends in January.

The future of sports betting in America may depend on what the justices decide. And the NFL — the most powerful league in American sports — is betting on the states.