Case: 25-1922 Document: 83 Page: 17 Date Filed: 09/24/2025
Page 16
1 jurisdiction over trading on designated contract markets
2 clearly preempts Defendants' efforts to regulate trading on
3 Kalshi, which is a designated contract market. We think this
4 case can begin and end for some of the reasons I think both
5 Judge Porter and Chief Judge Chagares, you're noting with
6 opposing counsel, can begin and end with the plain statutory
7 text.
8
And if I may begin where my colleague began, which is
9 on the definition of swap. I understand his real argument to
10 be, swaps have to be traded on exchange, and because they have
11 to be traded on exchange, everything's a felony under Kalshi's
12 view, and I want to be very clear, that is not our position,
13 and that is not what we believe the statute requires, for
14 reasons that defendants themselves point out in their brief.
15
What Section 2A of the Commodity Exchange Act does, is
16 it provides exclusive jurisdiction to the CFTC over on exchange
17 transactions, and then it has a savings clause, the savings
18 clause that my colleague referred to that says, except as
19 hereinabove provided by the grant of exclusive jurisdiction
20 over on exchange trading. The language that Congress used is
21 nothing contained in this section shall supersede or limit the
22 jurisdiction of regulatory authorities under the laws of any
23 state, or restrict state authorities from carrying out their
24 duties and responsibilities in accordance with such laws.
25
So that savings clause makes clear that nothing else
Veritext Legal Solutions 215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs