Case 1:25-cv-14723 Document 1 Filed 08/19/25 Page 18 of 28 PageID: 18
to clarify ‘the preemption of all other would-be regulators at every level of government.’” Witzel v. Chartered Sys. Corp. of N.Y. , 490 F. Supp. 343, 347 (D. Minn. 1989) (quoting Jones v. B. C. Christopher & Co. , 466 F. Supp. 213, 219 (D. Kan. 2979)). Likewise, the history surrounding the adoption of the “special rule” concerning event contracts in 2010 makes it clear that Congress intended the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction to embrace event contracts. See 156 Cong. Rec. S5906-07 (daily ed. July 15, 2010) (statements of Sens. Lincoln and Feinstein). 48. Congressional statements about the creation of the CFTC confirm the intent for broad express or implied field preemption. The 1974 amendments to the CEA were motivated by “concerns that states might regulate futures markets” themselves and create “conflicting regulatory requirements.” KalshiEx , 2025 WL 1218313, at *1; see also Mallen v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. , 605 F. Supp. 1105, 1112 (N.D. Ga. 1985) (“The congressional hearings focused on the need for sole regulatory power of commodities to be placed in one federal agency, unlike the regulation of securities which is shared by a federal agency and state agencies.”). Establishing the CFTC and endowing it with exclusive jurisdiction was meant to “avoid unnecessary, overlapping and duplicative regulation.” Ken Roberts Co. , 276 F.3d at 588 (quoting 120 Cong. Rec. 34,736 (1974) (remarks of House Agriculture Committee Chairman Poage)); see also 120 Cong. Rec. 34,997 (1974) (remarks of Sen. Curtis on behalf of Sen. Talmadge); Senate Hearings at 685 (statement of Sen. Clark) (“[D]ifferent State laws would just lead to total chaos.”). Accordingly, the CFTC was empowered to set forth uniform rules and regulations for “all exchanges and all persons in the industry.” H.R. Rep. No. 93-975, at 79 (1974). Congressional statements concerning the event contract “special rule,” including by the drafters of the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010, are consistent with these earlier statements and reveal clear Congressional intent to vest exclusive jurisdiction over event
18
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs