Ohio prediction market crackdown targets 10 operators
The Ohio Casino Control Commission has expanded its enforcement campaign against sports prediction markets, ordering 10 operators and brokers to stop offering sports event contracts to Ohio residents.
The Ohio prediction market crackdown follows a September 25 ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit involving Kalshi. The appeals court found that the Commodity Exchange Act does not preempt Ohio’s sports-gambling laws, strengthening the state regulator’s position that sports event contracts can fall within Ohio’s gambling framework.
The commission issued cease-and-desist notices dated October 2 to Underdog, Gemini Titan, Coinbase, ProphetX, Novig, Robinhood Derivatives, Polymarket’s U.S. entity, Plus500US Financial Services, Moomoo Financial and Webull Financial.
The companies were instructed to immediately stop offering, participating in offering or facilitating sports event contracts in Ohio and to confirm compliance with the commission within 14 days of the notices. The deadline is October 16.
Ohio Prediction Market Crackdown Expands
The Ohio Casino Control Commission said the targeted businesses are offering event contracts tied to sporting outcomes without holding an Ohio sports gaming license.
Under the regulator’s interpretation, the contracts allow customers to take positions on the outcome of sporting events or player performance, with money gained or lost depending on the result. The commission therefore considers the products to constitute sports gaming under Ohio law.
The Ohio prediction market crackdown marks a significant expansion beyond the state's earlier dispute with Kalshi. Kalshi was not among the 10 recipients of the October 2 notices.
The commission's notices state that offering sports gaming without the required Ohio license can expose businesses to civil and criminal consequences. The regulator also said it may pursue administrative, civil, nuisance or criminal actions if recipients fail to comply.
Sixth Circuit ruling changes regulatory landscape
The enforcement action is directly linked to the Sixth Circuit’s September 25 decision in KalshiEX LLC v. Schuler.
The federal appeals court considered whether Kalshi’s sports event contracts qualified as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act and whether federal law prevented Ohio and Tennessee from applying their gambling laws to those contracts.
The Sixth Circuit concluded that Kalshi had not demonstrated that the sports-event contracts satisfied the statutory definition of a swap. It also held that, even assuming the contracts were swaps, the Commodity Exchange Act did not preempt the state gambling laws at issue.
The ruling affirmed the denial of Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction against Ohio and vacated a preliminary injunction that had been issued in Tennessee.
For Ohio regulators, the decision provided a basis to resume or expand enforcement against other businesses offering similar products.
Ten operators face October 16 compliance deadline
The notices cover a range of prediction-market and financial services businesses.
The companies named by the Ohio Casino Control Commission are:
Underdog Predict and Underdog Exchange DCM
Gemini Titan
Coinbase
Prophet X
Novig Betting and Ludlow Exchange
Robinhood Derivatives
PM US Tech, the U.S. entity identified in the notice as Polymarket
Plus500US Financial Services
Moomoo Financial
Webull Financial
The commission's notices generally require the recipients to stop soliciting or accepting orders for sports event contracts from people located in Ohio. They also cover relevant activities involving designated contract markets and futures commission merchants.
The regulator said failure to comply could result in further legal action.
Prediction-market regulation remains unsettled
The Ohio action does not resolve the broader U.S. legal debate over prediction markets.
The Sixth Circuit ruling is one part of a continuing series of disputes between prediction-market operators and state regulators over whether sports event contracts should be treated primarily as federally regulated financial products or as sports wagering subject to state gambling laws.
The Ohio Casino Control Commission's latest action illustrates how an appellate ruling can affect businesses beyond the operator directly involved in the underlying litigation.
For prediction-market operators, the development increases the regulatory significance of state-by-state restrictions on sports contracts. For traditional gaming stakeholders, it also reinforces the continuing overlap between prediction markets and regulated sports betting.
The immediate question for the 10 recipients is whether they will comply with Ohio’s October 16 deadline or challenge the commission’s position through further legal or regulatory proceedings.
As the broader litigation continues, the treatment of sports event contracts is likely to remain an important issue for U.S. gaming regulators, prediction-market operators and companies seeking to enter the expanding event-contract sector.
About Asia Casino News
Asia Casino News covers developments across the casino, iGaming, betting, regulation and gaming industries in Asia and international markets. Our coverage follows the legal, regulatory and commercial changes shaping the global gambling industry. Visit Asia Casino News for more industry news, analysis and gambling guides.
Sources
Yogonet
Comments