The US Commodity Futures Trading Commission received 1,443 comments on its proposed prediction market rule. The comment period on the 267-page document closed on 27 July.
Lawmakers, state prosecutors and tribal organisations opposed the proposal. Former senator Christopher Dodd, co-author of the Dodd-Frank Act, said the rule 'contradicts the language and intent of the law' and undermines state and tribal sovereignty. Dodd noted that Congress inserted a specific provision into the Commodity Exchange Act precisely to prevent sports betting through regulated event contracts.
A coalition of 44 state attorneys general demanded the Commission withdraw the proposal, arguing that CFTC exceeds its authority and creates a nationwide betting market that bypasses established state and tribal systems. Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board and Arizona Department of Gaming also objected. Arizona is currently litigating against CFTC.
Sports leagues — the NFL and NBA — stopped short of calling for withdrawal but pressed for stronger integrity controls. The NFL said the proposed rules 'fall significantly short' of protecting integrity. Player unions asked to ban or restrict markets on athlete injuries, citing harassment and insider trading risks.
Operators backed the framework but sought clarifications. Polymarket wants a narrower definition of 'gaming' and preservation of individual contract review. Underdog supports banning injury and officiating markets but opposes mandatory purchase of official league data. DraftKings and FanDuel called for improved coordination with leagues.
Litigation continues in parallel. In May a federal court in Wisconsin allowed tribal groups to proceed with their lawsuit against Kalshi. In California the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in October repeatedly questioned Kalshi's attempt to separate its contracts from ordinary betting. CFTC will now review the comments and decide whether to revise the rule before finalising it.
