2:25-cv-575-APG-BNW MOTION HEARING - ROUGH DRAFT - DO NOT CITE!!!
66 because they can't offer these contracts to everyone. They're now prohibited from servicing, in a sense, Nevada customers and that would force them to lose their designation by the CFTC because they're violating core principles and that's an irreparable harm. How do you respond to that? MS. WHELAN: I think that's a pretty speculative harm that they're putting forward. I didn't see any support or evidence for that proposition. I think, again, as Your Honor suggested, they could go to the CFTC and say, listen, here's what we're dealing with. This is our proposed solution. Can you please pre-approve or bless this solution? And then depending on what the CFTC said would determine whether there actually was going to be some type of irreparable harm or not. THE COURT: So if the CFTC says, no, our principles are, you have to make it available to everybody on an equal basis, now we have a conflict between what the CFTC says it has to do and Nevada prohibiting it from. MS. WHELAN: Potentially, yeah. I can't see the CFTC going that route, but, again, without their participation, I just don't know. THE COURT: Okay. Let me catch my notes up for a second. Let's turn to the issue of the bond. You don't address that in your papers. If I grant Kalshi's motion, how much of a bond should they put up and why?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Judy K. Moore, RMR, CRR
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs