Kalshi and Montana Agree to Drop Cross-Complaints Over Prediction Market Dispute
Kalshi and the State of Montana have jointly agreed to dismiss their federal lawsuits against each other, ending a legal confrontation that began when state regulators accused the prediction market operator of offering unlicensed sports wagering. Under the agreement, Montana has committed to pause enforcement of its gambling laws against the company while a related matter remains pending before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Background of the Dispute
The conflict originated in March 2025, when the Montana Gambling Control Division issued a cease-and-desist letter to Kalshi, asserting that the company’s sports-related event contracts constituted gambling activity under state law. Kalshi later stated that Montana gaming representatives had reversed course on a non-enforcement understanding reached in 2025, which the company argued necessitated legal action.
After receiving a second cease-and-desist order, Kalshi filed a federal lawsuit against Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen and state gambling regulators, seeking a declaratory judgment that its federally regulated event contracts were not subject to state gambling regulation. The company has consistently maintained that, as a Designated Contract Market overseen by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), its markets operate under exclusive federal jurisdiction.
Terms of the Dismissal
The joint dismissal follows a recent Ninth Circuit ruling favorable to Kalshi’s position that prediction market contracts fall within the federal regulatory framework. In exchange for Kalshi withdrawing its declaratory judgment action, Montana has agreed not to pursue enforcement action while the appellate process continues. The arrangement effectively pauses the state-level dispute without resolving the underlying legal question of whether sports event contracts are securities-style derivatives or gambling products.
Broader Industry Context
The Montana resolution arrives amid a wider wave of regulatory and litigation activity involving prediction market operators. Several jurisdictions, including Arizona, Illinois, Ohio, and Nevada, have pursued cease-and-desist orders or litigation against Kalshi, while tribal nations in multiple states have brought claims asserting violations of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. At the same time, Kalshi has secured favorable rulings in select federal courts, contributing to an uneven and still-developing legal landscape.
