Nevada’s regulator of legalized sports betting has seen enough.
The Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB) announced Friday that it asked a state court to hold Kalshi in contempt - and impose “significant” fines - for what the regulator alleges is the prediction market operator's failure to stop offering online sports wagering.
- The NGCB asked a court to hold Kalshi in contempt and impose fines, alleging it failed to block Nevada users from trading sports, election, and entertainment event contracts.
- Nevada investigators say they were still able to purchase sports-related event contracts in the state despite a May court order requiring Kalshi to geoblock such activities.
- The dispute highlights the broader legal battle over whether prediction markets like Kalshi are regulated solely by federal authorities or can also be restricted by state gambling regulators.
The Nevada sports betting regulator says Kalshi is not complying with a May court order requiring it to geoblock users in the state from trading in sports, election, and entertainment-related event contracts.
“The Court has required Kalshi to stop offering covered event contracts in Nevada,” Nevada Gaming Control Board Chairman Mike Dreitzer said in a press release. “We will continue to vigorously enforce Nevada law to safeguard gaming in our state.”
Covers contacted spokespeople for Kalshi but did not hear back before this story was published.
Nevada Gaming Control Board wants @Kalshi held in contempt for not geo-fencing it site from the state.
— Howard Stutz (@howardstutz) June 13, 2026
“The Court has required Kalshi to stop offering covered event contracts in Nevada.” Board Chairman Mike Dreitzer.@TheNVIndy @NevadaGCB pic.twitter.com/p6MOQbg36I
Nevertheless, Friday’s announcement ups the ante for Kalshi in Nevada, which has already secured judgments against Kalshi and other prediction markets that require them to keep their most popular offering (de facto sports wagering) out of the state.
The NGCB is just one of many state-level gambling regulators seeking to restrain prediction markets from offering certain event contracts within their jurisdictions. However, Nevada has arguably been the most successful thus far, as other states have struggled with trying to shut down the federally regulated exchanges.
That is because of the ongoing legal dispute over who has authority to regulate prediction markets. The exchanges say that since they are subject to the federal oversight of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, state gambling regulators can’t restrict their businesses. The states contend otherwise.
Is this thing on?
The latest NGCB filing also suggests there could be some headaches in trying to force prediction markets to adjust their businesses on a state-by-state basis.
According to the regulator’s latest legal application, the board’s investigators were able to buy sports-related event contracts in Nevada despite the court order forbidding them.
Moreover, the filing claims Kalshi’s lawyers said the company decided to develop its own geofencing system rather than using “a tried and tested solution from a third-party vendor,” and then tested that system “by asking family and friends in Nevada to try to place wagers.”
“Those representations did not give the BOARD any confidence that KALSHI had developed and tested a technological solution that would prevent all people physically located in Nevada from purchasing the covered contracts,” the application says.
