Case: 25-7187, 03/10/2026, DktEntry: 75.1, Page 17 of 43
Moreover, if Crypto.com’s position is adopted, the reach of this definition would extend beyond sports betting to encompass other forms of gaming because, as the district court correctly held, Crypto.com’s preemption argument depends on an interpretation of “swap” that has “no limiting principle.” See ER-25. Crypto.com’s definition of “an event or contingency associated with a potential financial, economic, or commercial consequence” is so broad that it necessarily includes betting on other casino games. This means that virtually all gaming activity across the country, including that which would otherwise be conducted pursuant to an IGRA compact, must be offered on a DCM. The irony of this result is that the gaming conducted pursuant to tribal-state gaming compacts or state law provides significantly more consumer protection than the unregulated sports betting offered by Crypto.com, which allows users as young as 18 years old to engage in practically limitless betting with few, if any, guardrails. This lack of responsible gaming measures and consumer protections, which are required by legal gaming operations, is dangerous and contrary to the public interest. See Opinion and Order at 21 n.9, KalshiEX, LLC v. Schuler , No. 2:25-cv- 1165 (Mar. 9, 2026) (Ohio “determined [18 through 20-year-olds] were too young to participate in legal sports gambling, … but they have unrestricted access to sports-event contracts on Kalshi[]. This population is particularly vulnerable to problem gambling and [], when trading on Kalshi, is unprotected by Ohio’s
9
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs