Case 1:25-cv-14723 Document 10-1 Filed 08/19/25 Page 32 of 34 PageID: 104
436-37 (E.D. Pa. 2020) (holding that plaintiff established irreparable harm when “money
damages against the City would not be available on Plaintiffs’ preemption claims”). Continuing
to prevent New Jersey residents from opening new sports-related event contract positions would
also undermine customers’ confidence in Robinhood and their reliance on its financial services,
Mackenzie Decl. ¶ 18, causing irreparable harm, KalshiEx , 2025 WL 1218313, at *7; see also
GlaxoSmithKline LLC , 484 F. Supp. 3d at 226-28. Given the Division’s demand that Robinhood
comply with preempted state law, Robinhood had and has no way to avoid irreparable harm in
the absence of a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.
III.
THE EQUITIES AND PUBLIC INTEREST TILT STRONGLY IN ROBINHOOD’S FAVOR.
The balance of harms strongly favors Robinhood, just as it did for Kalshi. If the Court
does not grant the requested temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, the harm to
Robinhood will be significant. By contrast, the Division and the public would suffer little to no
harm if the requested relief is granted.
“[T]he interests favor injunction” because Robinhood can demonstrate that New Jersey
law is likely preempted as to the transactions at issue involving sports-related event contract
trades through Kalshi’s CFTC-designated market, just as Kalshi did. KalshiEx , 2025
WL 1218313, at *7; see also N.J. Retail Merchants Ass’n v. Sidamon-Eristoff , 669 F.3d 374, 389
(3d Cir. 2012). The state of New Jersey, and the public generally, can have no interest in
enforcing preempted state law against Robinhood. K.A. ex rel. Ayers v. Pocono Mountain Sch.
Dist. , 710 F.3d 99, 114 (3d Cir. 2013) (“[T]he enforcement of an unconstitutional law vindicates
no public interest.”); Am. Civ. Liberties Union v. Ashcroft , 322 F.3d 240, 251 n.11 (3d Cir. 2003)
(“[N]either the Government nor the public generally can claim an interest in the enforcement of
an unconstitutional law.” (internal quotation omitted)), aff’d , 542 U.S. 656 (2004). “The balance
25
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs