Case 2:25-cv-00575-APG-BNW Document 57 Filed 05/14/25 Page 3 of 25
(CFTC’s Unopposed Motion for Voluntary Dismissal). Absent the direct intervention of the NRA
1
as a party, this litigation could stop short of resolution on the merits with an unacceptable result
2
for the NRA and its members.
3
First, the NRA should be permitted to intervene as of right under Federal Rule of Civil
4
Procedure 24(a)(2). Many of the NRA’s members hold Nevada state -law licenses to operate in-
5
state sportsbooks. Acquiring and maintaining these licenses requires a significant investment of
6
time and resources to ensure compliance with Nevada’s comprehensive regulatory regime. The
7
value and interests in those licenses will be impaired by Kalshi’s preemption theory, by which it
8
seeks to evade state regulations and pose a direct competitive threat. While there is some overlap
9
in the arguments that will be raised by the NRA and by the NGCB, the NGCB’s arguments do not
10
fully and adequately represent the NRA’s economic and other interests. For example, the NRA is
11
best suited to provide the Court with factual and legal arguments as to why the sports bets offered
12
by Kalshi do not constitute “swaps” and are not “associated with a potential financial, economic,
13
or commercial consequence.” 7 U.S.C. § 1a(47)(A)(ii). Additionally, many of the NRA members
14
operate in multiple jurisdictions and can offer the Court additional perspective on multi-
15
jurisdictional compliance as well as the federal laws, such as the Wire Act, that outright bar
16
Kalshi’s offerings. 18 U.S.C. § 1084(a) -(b).
17
Alternatively, the Court should exercise its discretion to permit the NRA to intervene under
18
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(b)(1)(B). Since the NRA raises no new claims but merely
19
seeks to defend against Kalshi’s lawsuit, no independent jurisdictional ground is needed, and its
20
intervention shares a common question of law with this action. Given the important issues at stake
21
in this lawsuit, the Court should permit intervention in order to ensure a thorough presentation of
22
the law and facts. The current preliminary injunction permits an unlicensed and effectively
23
unregulated company to offer sports betting to Nevada residents without complying with any of
24
the requirements that have been established by the Nevada legislature and the NGCB over the
25
years. As the representative of the many participants in the multi-billion-dollar Nevada gaming
26
industry, the NRA is compelled to intervene to protect its interests and provide the Court with the
27
28
Page 2 of 24
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs