Case: 25-1922 Document: 83 Page: 11 Date Filed: 09/24/2025
Page 10
1 limitless, but if they're right about this, then everything
2 that counts as a swap and in our view, is pretty much
3 everything, would have to be regulated by the CFTC. We don't
4 think that's what Congress is doing. We see this in their
5 examples they use. They talk about the Eagles winning the
6 Super Bowl and things like that, but when you look at the
7 article, the reason that generated revenue is because they held
8 a parade and things like that, and same thing with the World
9 Cup. There's greater international appeal. We think that's
10 too attenuated. This is why Congress meant to link it to a
11 financial measurement or -- or instrument, and that's what they
12 were doing here, and that's what the clear statement rules are
13 pointing to.
14
JUDGE PORTER: There's no examples of sports betting
15 that are not swaps?
16
MR. EHRLICH: Well, I -- we give some examples that
17 could be game, like, essentially gaming adjacent that are --
18 that could be swaps and therefore would trigger the special
19 rule. So things around gaming. So the revenue of the
20 Pittsburgh Steelers, for example, we think is linked to a
21 financial measurement, the revenue, and so it would be a swap,
22 it would fall into the special rule and up to the CFTC to
23 exclude it, but things about the sports game itself, probably
24 not. We can't envision anything that would be a swap in that
25 scenario.
Veritext Legal Solutions 215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs