2026 Membership Book FINAL

Case 2:25-cv-00575-APG-BNW Document 57 Filed 05/14/25 Page 13 of 25

practices, associations and activities related to the operation of licensed gaming establishments

1

and the manufacture, sale or distribution of gaming devices and associated equipment.” NRS

2

463.0129(1)(c). While the NGCB has similar interests in upholding the integrity of the gaming

3

market, the NRA members will suffer a distinct and specific harm if patrons lose confidence in

4

the integrity of their products based on operations by Kalshi.

5

Third , Kalshi’s preemption argument could even result in a bizarre result that the CFTC

6

has authority over some types of state sports betting, not currently traded on a CFTC exchange.

7

The CEA gives the CFTC exclusive jurisdiction over “[1] accounts, agreements . . . , and

8

transactions involving [2] swaps or contracts of sale of a commodity for future delivery . . . traded

9

or executed on [3] a contract market designated pursuant to section 7 of this title or a swap

10

execution facility pursuant to section 7b – 3 of this title or any other board of trade, exchange, or

11

market.” 7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1)(A). Moreover, the CEA correspondingly prohibits “accounts,

12

agreements . . . , and transactions involving swaps or contracts of sale of a commodity for future

13

delivery” unless they take place on CFTC-regulated exchanges . 7 U.S.C. § 2(e) makes it generally

14

unlawful to “enter into a swap unless the swap is entered into on, or subject to the rules of, a board

15

of trade designated as a contract market under section 7 of this titl e,” and 7 U.S.C. § 6d(a)(1)

16

“prohibits anyone from soliciting or accepting orders for swaps or options contracts if they are not

17

registered with the CFTC as a futures commission merchant.” CFTC v. Yukom Commc’ns Ltd. ,

18

No. 19-cv-5416, 2021 WL 4477874, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 30, 2021). To the extent that the sports

19

bets offered by Kalshi are considered to be swaps and so the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction over

20

such swaps, then this could even require other types of sports bets to be only offered on a CFTC

21

exchange.

22

The acceptance of Kalshi’s claim could create a potential competitive threat to many of

23

the NRA’s members, could require them to wholly restructure their current sports betting

24

operations, and could devalue the regulatory infrastructure that the NRA members have invested

25

in . Since resolution of Kalshi’s claim “actually will affect” the NRA’s members’ value and use of

26

their state gaming licenses, Arakaki v. Cayetano , 324 F.3d 1078, 1084 (9th Cir. 2003) (quotation

27

28

Page 12 of 24

Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs