Massachusetts Regulators Say Prediction Markets Are Illegal and Target Under-21 Bettors

Massachusetts has become one of the most aggressive states in the country when it comes to cracking down on prediction markets, and the person leading the charge is Massachusetts Gaming Commission Chair Jordan Maynard. In recent months, Maynard has made a series of pointed public statements about platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket — calling their sports wagering operations illegal, accusing them of targeting bettors under the legal age, and drawing a sharp line between regulated sports betting and what he considers to be unregulated gambling dressed up in financial language.

What Maynard Actually Said

Maynard has not been subtle. In a recent appearance on WCVB’s “On The Record,” he addressed prediction markets directly and at length. “These prediction markets are illegally offering sports wagers,” he said. He accused the companies of targeting and accepting bets from people under the age of 21, the legal minimum for sports wagering in Massachusetts. He also took particular aim at Polymarket, blasting the platform for offering contracts tied to geopolitical conflict. “Taking bets on war and death is disgusting, and we would never allow that on a regulated site in Massachusetts,” Maynard said.

In an earlier statement tied to the attorney general’s lawsuit against Kalshi, Maynard framed the issue in terms of consumer protection. “Prediction market companies are expanding into sports wagering while neglecting age restrictions, player protection programs, state taxes, and other consumer protections,” he said. “My fellow commissioners and I appreciate the Attorney General’s efforts to enforce the law and hold these companies accountable to Massachusetts’ rigorous standards.”

Maynard also used a memorable analogy when speaking to Semafor. “I don’t know what else to call it, except for, you know, cosplaying,” he told the outlet. “If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck, right?” That quote captures the MGC’s core argument: whatever these platforms call themselves, what they are actually selling to Massachusetts customers is sports wagering — and sports wagering in Massachusetts requires a license from the Gaming Commission.

The Lawsuit and the Injunction

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission did not stop at public statements. In September 2025, Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell filed a lawsuit in Suffolk Superior Court against KalshiEX LLC, alleging that the platform was promoting and accepting online sports wagers from Massachusetts customers without the required state license. The lawsuit specifically alleged that Kalshi allows users between the ages of 18 and 21 to bet on its platform, violating Massachusetts law that sets 21 as the minimum age for online sports wagering.

The AGO’s complaint also alleged that Kalshi’s platform lacked the safeguards required of licensed operators — inadequate responsible gambling tools, no compliant self-limiting options such as appropriate maximum deposits or maximum wagers, and no comprehensive compliance review by the MGC. As part of the filing, the AGO requested that a court order Kalshi to cease offering sports wagering in Massachusetts while the lawsuit was pending. In January 2026, a Massachusetts judge granted that injunction, ordering Kalshi to halt operations in the state while the case proceeds.

Why the Age Argument Matters

The under-21 issue is not a technicality. Massachusetts set 21 as the minimum age for online sports wagering deliberately, as part of the consumer protection framework that governs the state’s licensed operators. Kalshi’s platform operates under CFTC rules that allow participation at age 18 — consistent with financial markets standards, but inconsistent with state gambling law. From the MGC’s perspective, this is not a gray area: platforms that allow 18-to-20-year-olds to place what function as sports bets are operating outside the law, regardless of how those contracts are labeled federally.

For Massachusetts sports bettors who are 21 or older and betting legally through licensed platforms, this has a practical implication. The regulatory framework that protects them — age verification, responsible gambling tools, deposit limits, self-exclusion options — is something they may have never thought much about. But it exists because regulators like Maynard spent years building it. The argument being made in Boston is that prediction markets are accessing the same customer base without playing by the same rules.

The National Picture

Massachusetts is not alone. States including Nevada, Ohio, Tennessee, and Arizona have also taken enforcement action against prediction markets. Ohio issued a $5 million fine to Kalshi. Arizona became the first state to file criminal charges against a prediction market operator. Nevada courts have temporarily shut Kalshi down in that state. And Kalshi has filed lawsuits of its own, arguing that CFTC registration grants federal preemption over state gambling laws.

That federal preemption question — whether the CFTC’s exclusive authority over derivatives markets shields platforms like Kalshi from state gambling enforcement — is the central unresolved legal issue in the entire debate. No state court has definitively settled it. The Ninth Circuit is hearing arguments in the Nevada case, which may produce the most significant ruling to date on whether state gaming regulators even have jurisdiction over federally registered exchanges.

What It Means for Massachusetts Bettors

If you are betting on sports in Massachusetts through a licensed sportsbook, the immediate impact of the Kalshi ruling is that one competitor has been removed from the market. Whether that makes your betting experience meaningfully different depends on how much overlap existed between your sportsbook activity and the event contracts Kalshi was offering. For most casual bettors, probably not much.

But the broader pattern matters. Massachusetts has positioned itself as a state willing to enforce its gaming laws aggressively, and the MGC’s partnership with the AG’s office signals that enforcement is not going to be passive. For bettors who had been using Kalshi or were curious about prediction markets, the legal pathway to do that in Massachusetts is currently closed. Whether it reopens — through a court ruling, a federal legislative resolution, or a Massachusetts licensing framework — remains to be seen.