Kalshi asks the full Sixth Circuit to rehear its Ohio and Tennessee cases en banc

Kalshi asked the full US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday, Oct. 13, 2026, to rehear two cases involving Ohio and Tennessee officials, according to defirate.com. The petition challenges a late-September ruling by a three-judge panel and follows Kalshi’s request for en banc review after an unfavorable Ninth Circuit decision.

The dispute over federal authority

The Sixth Circuit panel left intact the denial of Kalshi’s requested preliminary injunction against Ohio gambling regulators and law enforcement. It also reversed a preliminary injunction protecting Kalshi from those authorities in Tennessee. The court consolidated Kalshi v. Schuler and Kalshi v. Orgel because both states fall within its jurisdiction and the cases presented identical legal questions.

Kalshi’s rehearing request contests two aspects of the panel’s interpretation of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA), according to defirate.com: whether federal law preempts state gambling laws and whether sports event contracts qualify as swaps. Kalshi argues that federal preemption applies and that its sports contracts meet the statutory definition.

The company disputes the panel’s conclusion that the CEA’s exclusive federal jurisdiction can coexist with certain state laws. It also argues that Congress did not define swaps according to the subject of the underlying event or categorically exclude sports events.

Supreme Court petitions add uncertainty

The Sixth Circuit is not required to accept the petition, and en banc rehearings are rare, according to defirate.com. A refusal could lead Kalshi to seek Supreme Court review. The outlet reported that Kalshi had not yet formally petitioned the Supreme Court over an unfavorable decision.

Other parties have already sought Supreme Court intervention, including Coinbase, Robinhood and New Jersey officials. The National Football League and attorneys general from 39 states are among those supporting the New Jersey officials’ petition. The Supreme Court has not announced whether it will hear that case or the Ninth Circuit ruling appealed by Coinbase and Robinhood.

If the Supreme Court accepts either dispute, it could address the same preemption and swap-definition questions raised by Kalshi, potentially reducing the significance of further Sixth Circuit proceedings. The rehearing request keeps Kalshi’s appellate challenge moving while those petitions remain unresolved.

What it means for prediction markets

• The filing is a request, not a reversal. The September panel decision favored Ohio and Tennessee officials on preliminary injunctions; full-court review remains uncertain.
• Sports-contract classification remains central. Kalshi’s arguments concern both whether these contracts are swaps under the CEA and whether federal authority displaces state gambling laws.
• The Supreme Court docket is another key checkpoint. Acceptance of either pending dispute could bring the overlapping legal questions before the justices, changing the importance of the Sixth Circuit process.