Case 2:25-cv-01541-JCM-DJA Document 1 Filed 08/19/25 Page 3 of 26
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
enter positions for sports-related event contracts. Kalshi took a different approach, filing a lawsuit seeking declaratory and injunctive relief from this Court on the basis that, as applied to trading on its CFTC-designated contract market, Nevada law is preempted by the Commodity Exchange Act’s (“CEA”) comprehensive federal framework for regulating commodity futures and swaps trading. KalshiEx LLC v. Hendrick , No. 2:25-CV-00575-APG-BNW, ECF No. 1 (D. Nev. filed Mar. 28, 2025). 4. Kalshi has won preliminary relief—the Court granted Kalshi’s motions for a preliminary injunction, holding that Kalshi demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits concerning its argument that Nevada law is preempted, that it will likely suffer irreparable harm without relief, and that the balance of interests favor injunction. KalshiEX, LLC v. Hendrick , No. 2:25-CV-00575-APG-BNW, 2025 WL 1073495, at *2-8 (D. Nev. Apr. 9, 2025) (hereinafter “ KalshiEx ”). Kalshi has won similar preliminary relief in New Jersey. See KalshiEx, LLC v. Flaherty , No. 25-CV-02152-ESK-MJS, 2025 WL 1218313, at *8 (D.N.J. Apr. 28, 2025) (hereinafter “ KalshiEx (D.N.J.) ”) (enjoining New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement and its members from enforcing similar New Jersey laws against Kalshi for offering sports-related event contract trading on its CFTC-designated exchange), appeal filed , No. 25-1922 (3d Cir. May 8, 2025). 5. Despite these rulings, the Board continues to threaten to enforce preempted Nevada law against Robinhood, even though the Board is currently enjoined by this Court from doing so against Kalshi with respect to the same transactions. On May 6, 2025, after this Court’s decision in KalshiEx , No. 2:25-CV-00575, 2025 WL 1073495, Robinhood met with the Board and explained that it believed it should be able to offer sports-related event contracts trading through Kalshi’s exchange for as long as this Court’s order in KalshiEx remains in effect. At the conclusion of that meeting, Board employees indicated they did not expect to be able to agree to refrain from enforcement action against Robinhood, even while the KalshiEx order is in place. They stated that they would contact Robinhood if they ultimately reached a different conclusion, and to date, they have not done so.
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
3
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs