Nevada Judge Denies Crypto.com Sports Contract Injunction
Summary
Federal Judge Andrew Gordon has refused Crypto.com’s request for an injunction that would have allowed the firm to keep offering sports event contracts in Nevada. The decision contrasts with an earlier ruling from the same judge that had allowed Kalshi to continue operating under an injunction. Crypto.com argued its contracts are federally regulated “swaps” under the Commodity Exchange Act and therefore within CFTC jurisdiction, not state gaming law; the court declined to grant that protection this time. Crypto.com plans to appeal to the Ninth Circuit.
Key Points
- Judge Andrew Gordon denied Crypto.com’s injunction to continue offering sports event contracts in Nevada.
- Crypto.com argued its contracts are CFTC-regulated “swaps” rather than state-governed gambling products.
- The same judge previously granted an injunction to Kalshi on similar grounds — the differing outcomes raise legal questions about how “swap” is defined.
- The court’s reasoning has not been fully published, but the definition of a swap (requiring financial or economic consequence) is central.
- The CFTC has issued guidance stating it has not yet decided whether sports event contracts are legal under its remit, adding regulatory uncertainty.
- Crypto.com intends to appeal to the Ninth Circuit; Kalshi still holds an injunction in Nevada but lost a similar case in Maryland.
- Industry commentators warn that if sports contracts are not deemed swaps, the business model for prediction markets could be threatened.
Content Summary
Crypto.com sued after the Nevada Gaming Control Board ordered it to stop offering contracts tied to sporting-event outcomes. The company’s legal strategy relied heavily on the Kalshi ruling, citing it 38 times, and contended that federal commodities law (CFTC oversight) should pre-empt state gambling regulation. Judge Gordon declined to extend the Kalshi-style protection to Crypto.com; the full opinion is awaited but may hinge on whether the contracts carry the required financial/economic consequences to qualify as swaps. The CFTC has signalled it has not made a definitive decision on the legality of such products, and Crypto.com will seek appellate review in the Ninth Circuit. Kalshi remains protected in Nevada but faced setbacks elsewhere (Maryland).
Context and Relevance
This ruling sits at the crossroads of crypto, prediction markets and gambling law. It feeds into a broader, ongoing contest between state gaming regulators and firms that want federal oversight via the CFTC. For companies building prediction-market products, the decision — and any subsequent appellate rulings — will shape where and how they can operate in the US. Regulators, operators and investors should watch appeals and any clarifications from the CFTC closely.
Why should I read this?
Short version: if you care about crypto prediction markets, sports betting law or regulatory risk — this one matters. The judge’s flip from the earlier Kalshi outcome makes for drama and big potential consequences. Read it if you want to know whether prediction markets will be policed by states or the CFTC — that split determines who can sell these products, where they’ll be legal, and how risky they look to investors and partners.
Source
Source: https://www.gamblingnews.com/news/nevada-judge-denies-crypto-com-sports-contract-injunction/
