The May 20 Senate Hearing Could Change Sports Betting — Here’s What to Watch

On May 20, 2026, the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Technology, and Data Privacy will convene a hearing titled “No Sure Bets: Protecting Sports Integrity in America.” It sounds like a routine oversight event, but this one is different. For the first time in American legislative history, prediction markets are sitting at the same table as the licensed sportsbook industry in a formal Congressional hearing — and what comes out of it could reshape the landscape for every sports bettor in the country.

Who Is Testifying and Why the Panel Tells a Story

Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, who chairs the subcommittee, assembled a witness list that says a lot about what Congress actually wants to examine. Five witnesses are confirmed to appear at 10:00 a.m. Eastern in Russell 253.

Bill Miller, President and CEO of the American Gaming Association, will represent the regulated sportsbook industry. He arrives carrying months of lobbying freight: in January 2026, the AGA and the Indian Gaming Association sent a joint letter to Congress calling for legislation to explicitly ban sports event contracts on CFTC-registered prediction market platforms. The AGA has characterized these contracts as “indistinguishable from legal sports betting” and argues they exploit a regulatory gray zone to bypass the state licensing frameworks that legal sportsbooks operate under.

Patrick McHenry, a former congressman now serving as Senior Advisor to the Coalition for Prediction Markets, will represent the other side. The Coalition — formed in December 2025 by Kalshi, Robinhood, Coinbase, Crypto.com, and others — has pledged to spend millions defending the CFTC-regulated framework for prediction markets in Washington. McHenry showing up is not a token gesture; it signals prediction markets have real political muscle behind them now.

Rounding out the panel are Mary Beth Thomas, Executive Director of the Tennessee Sports Wagering Council, who brings a state regulatory perspective; Scott Sadin, Co-Founder and CEO of Integrity Compliance 360, who will focus on fraud detection and match-fixing; and Dr. Harry Levant, Director of Gambling Policy at the Public Health Advocacy Institute, who was added to the panel shortly after the initial announcement and represents the public health angle — particularly the concern over expanded gambling access for younger users.

The Kalshi Legal Win That Made This Hearing Necessary

To understand why this hearing matters, you need to understand how prediction markets got here. Kalshi is a federally registered Designated Contract Market (DCM) — essentially a licensed derivatives exchange regulated by the CFTC, not state gaming commissions. In 2024, a federal district court sided with Kalshi against the CFTC over the company’s political event contracts, finding that the CFTC had exceeded its authority in trying to block them. The D.C. Circuit Court later heard the appeal, and the CFTC under the Trump administration ultimately dropped its opposition in 2025.

With that legal runway cleared, Kalshi launched sports event contracts in January 2025. States pushed back hard. Nevada, New Jersey, and Maryland all sent cease-and-desist letters. Kalshi sued those states. In April 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a landmark 2-1 ruling affirming a preliminary injunction in Kalshi’s favor against New Jersey — the first federal appeals court to hold that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling laws as applied to sports-related event contracts traded on a CFTC-registered platform. It is still a preliminary ruling, not a final determination, and the circuit courts are not in agreement. Maryland and Massachusetts have ruled differently. A Supreme Court showdown is widely expected within the next two years.

That legal fragmentation — courts pulling in opposite directions, the CFTC leaning permissive, and states fighting to protect their tax revenue — is precisely what has pushed Congress to act. The state-by-state guide to legal betting shows how carefully each state has built its own framework; prediction markets operating under federal jurisdiction threaten to override all of it.

What Is Actually on the Table

The May 20 hearing is not legislation, but the legislative vehicles are already parked nearby. Several bills have been introduced in Congress with varying approaches to the problem.

The “Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act,” introduced by Senators Schiff (D-CA) and Curtis (R-UT) in March 2026, would amend the Commodity Exchange Act to explicitly prohibit CFTC-registered platforms from offering sports event contracts. The “Event Contract Enforcement Act” takes a similar direction. The “Prediction Markets Security and Integrity Act of 2026,” introduced by Senator Blumenthal, takes a broader approach — requiring age verification (21 and over), consumer protections, and returning regulatory authority to states. The “STOP Corrupt Bets Act” from Senators Merkley and Warren goes even further, targeting not just sports contracts but also trading on elections, war outcomes, and government actions.

Senator Blackburn has indicated she intends to deliver a recommendation framework before the August recess. The Senate Commerce and Banking Committees are expected to try to reconcile competing approaches before the 2026 midterms consume the legislative calendar.

Why Sports Bettors Should Actually Care

If you use a licensed sportsbook in a legal state, you might assume this is someone else’s fight. It is not. The outcome of this debate will affect the product you use, the competitive environment that shapes odds and promotions, and potentially which platforms are available to you in the long run.

The tension runs deep in the industry itself. DraftKings, FanDuel, Fanatics Betting, and bet365 all left the AGA between late 2025 and early 2026, citing disagreement with the trade group’s position on prediction markets. DraftKings and FanDuel have launched their own prediction market products. That means some of the biggest names in legal sports betting are now on the opposite side of this debate from the organization that has historically lobbied on their behalf.

The DFS and prediction market platforms now operate in a fluid space where their regulatory status could change dramatically depending on what Congress does or what the courts eventually decide. Kalshi’s sports contract volume grew from roughly $24 million in 2024 to an estimated $1.3 billion annualized run rate in 2026. That is not a niche experiment anymore — it is a market that has scaled fast enough to threaten state tax revenue, tribal gaming compacts, and the market share of licensed sportsbooks simultaneously.

There is also a consumer protection issue worth watching. Prediction markets currently allow users as young as 18 to access sports wagering, while licensed sportsbooks in every legal state require bettors to be at least 21. That age gap is one of the arguments Dr. Levant is expected to press on May 20.

What to Watch For on May 20

A hearing does not produce legislation by itself. But the framing matters, the questions senators ask matter, and the fact that Patrick McHenry is sitting at the table alongside Bill Miller — rather than testifying in a separate proceeding about commodities markets — is genuinely significant. Watch for how senators on both sides characterize prediction markets: as innovative financial instruments that deserve a federal framework, or as unregulated sportsbooks exploiting a legal loophole. That framing will tell you a great deal about where Congressional energy is heading.

Watch also for whether Senator Blackburn signals a preference for one of the specific bills already in circulation, or whether she calls for a more comprehensive approach. The August recess deadline she has set herself is not far away, and the midterms will make major legislation harder after the summer. If something moves, it will need to move soon. For sports bettors, May 20 is not the end of anything — it is the starting gun for the most consequential regulatory battle the industry has seen since Murphy v. NCAA brought legal sports betting to the states in 2018.