Infiniti Intelligence Hourly Briefing — Oct 9, 2026 · 2:54 AM ET

Kalshi, Polymarket and the Coalition for Prediction Markets have spent at least $3 million in 2026 on lobbying and campaign contributions at the state and federal levels, according to an OpenSecrets report covered by Stateline and republished by usa-today-news.com. The spending comes amid a dispute over whether prediction markets fall exclusively under federal financial regulation or must also comply with state gambling rules.

Kalshi targets state political networks

Kalshi, described in the reporting as the largest prediction-market platform by a wide margin, has directed substantial contributions toward organizations supporting governors and attorneys general. OpenSecrets found that it gave more than $300,000 combined to the Republican Attorneys General Association and the Democratic Attorneys General Association. In the first half of 2026, it also contributed $100,000 to the Republican Governors Association and $150,000 to the Democratic Governors Association.

The company has retained at least one lobbyist in 41 states, with particular attention to California and New York. Its lobbying footprint includes every state that has introduced legislation specifically addressing prediction markets, according to the analysis. Kalshi spokesperson Dani Lever told OpenSecrets that the company supports candidates from both parties.

Federal lobbying remains another substantial expense. Kalshi alone spent nearly $1 million during the first half of 2026, targeting the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the White House, the Securities & Exchange Commission and both chambers of Congress.

A fight over regulatory authority

Platforms argue that their contracts belong in the same regulatory category as commodity-market products rather than sportsbook wagers. State lawmakers from both parties counter that prediction markets bypass gambling restrictions, taxes and consumer safeguards, particularly through sports contracts. The conflict has produced regulatory action, legislation and lawsuits involving states, platforms and the Trump administration, which has sought to limit state oversight.

During the summer, Kalshi Head of Corporate Development Sara Slane told lawmakers that the company wanted stronger relationships with states while maintaining that its CFTC regulation excluded state oversight. The five-member CFTC currently has four vacancies and has sued nine states that tried to regulate the industry. Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest son, holds financial stakes in both Kalshi and Polymarket, according to the reporting.

Many observers expect the U.S. Supreme Court eventually to determine the states’ regulatory role. Brad Lipton, director of the Roosevelt Institute’s corporate power and financial regulation program, told OpenSecrets that the dispute bears directly on the industry’s viability. He questioned whether its business model could compete while complying with state law and characterized the lobbying campaign as an attempt to use political influence to compensate for weaknesses in its legal position.

What it means for prediction markets

• Jurisdiction remains the central uncertainty. The dispute concerns whether federal derivatives oversight displaces state gambling regulation, including for sports contracts.
• Political spending is not a legal outcome. The reported $3 million minimum establishes the scale of the influence campaign, not whether platforms will prevail in court or legislatures.
• State and federal developments both matter. Kalshi’s presence in 41 states and its federal lobbying show that the contest is proceeding across multiple levels of government.
• Supreme Court involvement remains an expectation. The reporting describes observers anticipating an eventual ruling, rather than an established resolution of the dispute.

The NFL has backed New Jersey’s cert petition in Flaherty v. KalshiEX, adding its voice to a dispute over whether federal commodities law displaces state gambling rules. According to Fox News, the league filed an amicus brief on Thursday arguing that sports prediction markets constitute gambling and should be subject to state oversight.

A dispute over jurisdiction and integrity

New Jersey is challenging a federal appeals court ruling that favored Kalshi’s interpretation of federal commodities law, Fox News reported. The NFL urged prompt court action, warning that billions of dollars would be wagered on its games through prediction markets each season and that delays could increase risks to consumers and game integrity.

The league’s concerns extend to specific contracts. Before the season began, it told operators it objected to markets involving coaching decisions, officiating decisions and injuries, as well as other outcomes potentially influenced by inside information. According to Fox News, the NFL criticized the Commodity Futures Trading Commission for failing to address contracts it had identified months earlier that operators including Kalshi continued to list.

An NFL source told Fox News that billions of dollars in NFL wagers had already been placed on prediction markets this season. The source framed the dispute as a question of regulatory safeguards rather than opposition to prediction markets themselves, while questioning whether the CFTC had sufficient staffing and resources. Fox News also noted an eligibility difference: prediction markets are available to people 18 and older, compared with 21 and older for online sportsbooks.

Federal regulator and platforms push back

CFTC public affairs director Brooke Nethercott told Fox News Digital that the agency had engaged with the NFL on policy and rulemaking, but that the league declined to sign a memorandum of understanding intended to support cooperation and information sharing. Although the NFL has official online sportsbook deals and has not partnered with prediction markets, an unnamed CFTC source said senior league staff had indicated just weeks earlier that commercial agreements with several operators were close.

Kalshi disputed the NFL’s account of federal oversight, saying the CFTC actively supervises sports-related markets and that ongoing rulemaking addresses many of the league’s concerns. It also cited partnerships with MLB, NHL and USTA. Separately, Polymarket told Fox News it uses market surveillance tools and is working with the CFTC, SEC and other professional leagues, arguing that a coordinated federal framework offers more consistent integrity protections than separate state regimes.

What it means for prediction markets

• Jurisdiction remains the central issue. New Jersey’s challenge concerns whether federal commodities law overrides state gambling regulation; the NFL’s brief supports the state’s effort to obtain further review.
• Contract design is part of the dispute. The league’s objections target markets involving injuries, coaching and officiating, not just wagers on game results.
• Cooperation remains contested. The NFL questions federal safeguards and resources, while the CFTC and operators point to engagement, rulemaking and integrity partnerships.
• The filing is advocacy, not a ruling. It adds the NFL’s arguments to the case but does not itself resolve which regulatory framework governs sports prediction markets.