Nevada Senators Push to Block CFTC From Using Federal Funds to Sue States Over Prediction Markets

Nevada Sens. Jacky Rosen and Catherine Cortez Masto have joined a group of Senate colleagues calling on the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government to bar the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) from using federal funds to prevent states and tribal nations from regulating online prediction markets. The push is led by Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore.

The effort follows a string of CFTC lawsuits targeting states that have tried to regulate or impose safeguards on platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket, which have expanded their sports-related event contract offerings dramatically over the past year despite operating without traditional sports betting licenses in most states.

Nevada’s Direct Stake in the Fight

Nevada’s involvement isn’t incidental. The Nevada Gaming Control Board issued a cease-and-desist order to both Kalshi and Polymarket back in March 2025, part of an early wave of state-level pushback against sports prediction markets. Nevada has one of the most established sports betting regulatory frameworks in the country, and its gaming board has consistently argued that sports-related event contracts function as unlicensed sports wagering rather than legitimate financial derivatives.

The senators’ letter reflects a broader concern that the CFTC’s litigation campaign — which has included suits against states and tribal nations attempting to assert oversight — could effectively nullify decades of state-level gaming regulation if the agency succeeds in establishing broad federal preemption over event contracts tied to sports outcomes.

Part of a Widening Congressional Fight

The Rosen-Cortez Masto push adds to a growing list of congressional interventions in the prediction markets debate. A separate bipartisan bill from Sens. Adam Schiff and John Curtis aims to amend the Commodity Exchange Act to explicitly reclassify sports-related event contracts as gambling, which would strip the CFTC of jurisdiction over the products regardless of how ongoing court battles are resolved.

Legal experts tracking the litigation say the underlying dispute over who regulates prediction markets — state gaming commissions or the CFTC — is likely headed for the Supreme Court, with a Third Circuit ruling favoring the CFTC’s preemption argument in a related New Jersey case seen as a meaningful data point in the agency’s favor. Even if the CFTC prevails at the Supreme Court, however, congressional action like the Schiff-Curtis bill could still override the outcome legislatively.

What’s at Stake for Nevada

For a state built around a highly regulated Nevada sports betting and casino gaming industry, the outcome of this fight carries outsized stakes. If the CFTC’s position holds and expands, Nevada’s decades of gaming oversight authority could face new competition from federally regulated prediction market platforms operating with a fundamentally different compliance framework — one built around commodities trading rules rather than state gaming licenses.