Nevada is no country for sports-related event contracts.
Courts in the state have already cracked down on federally regulated prediction markets, forcing them to take their nearly nationwide form of de facto sports betting elsewhere.
Meanwhile, in D.C., federal lawmakers from Nevada continue to push legislation that would officially ban those contracts.
- Two Nevada lawmakers introduced a bipartisan bill that would (like a similar bill in the Senate) ban prediction markets from offering sports and casino-style event contracts that resemble sports betting.
- The bill would still permit other event contracts, such as those tied to weather and economics, while affirming state and tribal authority over gaming regulation.
- Although the bill is unlikely to become law soon, it reflects ongoing efforts by Nevada lawmakers to close what they describe as a loophole that bypasses state gambling rules.
The latest legislative effort in Washington comes from Nevada Congressmen Steven Horsford and Mark Amodei, who introduced their “Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act” on Thursday.
Their bill shares the same name as one introduced earlier this year by Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto and two others. It also has the same goal: shutting down any de facto sports betting offered by prediction markets.
“This bipartisan bill closes a federal loophole that allows sports betting to masquerade as financial trading and ensures legitimate event contracts remain under the CFTC’s jurisdiction,” Rep. Amodei said in a statement.
A Super Bowl wager by any other name
According to a summary, the bill proposes to prohibit sports and “casino-style” event contracts from being offered and traded on the federally regulated exchanges.
“A wager on the Super Bowl does not become a financial product simply because it is offered through a trading app,” a press release said.
The bill would also allow other types of event contracts to continue to trade, such as those tied to the weather and economics.
Furthermore, the legislation (like its companion in the Senate) would try to put to bed one of the key drivers of the prediction market debates, which is whether states can curb those activities or if they are solely the responsibility of the federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
That is the main point of contention in the numerous lawsuits that have sprung up across the U.S. involving prediction markets and state gambling regulators. One of those lawsuits ultimately forced prediction markets to restrict their activities in Nevada.
Nevada congressmen introduce bipartisan bill to ban sports betting on prediction markets
— Howard Stutz (@howardstutz) July 23, 2026
Rep. Steven Horsford (D-NV) and Rep. Mark Amodei’s (R-NV) bill would also ban casino-style games on sites such as Kalshi.
Via @MiniRacker @TheNVIndy https://t.co/5lchAOq9tT
With this in mind, perhaps, the bill includes “an explicit rule of construction that nothing in federal law preempts state or tribal authority over gaming,” the summary says.
“States and tribes remain free to set and enforce their own gaming policies,” it adds.
The latest bill is now one of several percolating in Congress regarding prediction markets. Horsford, for example, is a cosponsor of legislation that would bar federal politicians and bureaucrats from using insider information to bet on prediction markets.
It seems unlikely any of these bills will become law, but it at least signals there is ongoing interest in Washington about doing something, particularly when the lawmakers are from a state like Nevada, where so much of the economy is tied to gambling.
"This is about protecting jobs, protecting consumers, and protecting the integrity of our gaming industry," Rep. Horsford said in the release. "Nevada has always been the gold standard for gaming regulations. These companies are exploiting a federal loophole that allows them to effectively sidestep state oversight that every other legal sportsbook must follow.”
