CFTC chairman Selig calls state cases against prediction markets “really egregious”
CFTC Chairman Michael Selig called state cases against prediction markets "really egregious" and wants the fight settled at the Supreme Court.
Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Michael Selig used an appearance at the Cantor Convergence conference this week to step up his criticism on states that are going after prediction market platforms and the people who run them. He called the state suits “really egregious,” The Block reported on Nov. 13, 2026.
“We’re seeing states bring criminal charges, essentially trying to lock up founders and CEOs of these companies that are offering lawful products under a federal regime,” he said.
Selig argued that the core dispute, whether an event contract is a gambling product or a derivative, belongs in court, without the threat of prison. “Somebody says it’s gambling, somebody says it’s a derivative,” he argued. “That’s not something that should be at the risk of going to jail.”
A Supreme Court fight instead of state-by-state cases
Rather than fight state by state, Selig wants the jurisdiction question taken to the Supreme Court. “I don’t understand whether we’re going to have every major CEO of an exchange locked up in a jail cell in Utah, or if we can just go to the Supreme Court and hash this thing out on the merits,” he said.
He made the same point to CNBC at the Miami Beach conference: “We’re going to fight this up to the Supreme Court if that’s where it’s going.” He added: “Our view on the statute is that we have exclusive jurisdiction over these markets, and I will not allow for states to go bring lawsuits against our exchanges, claiming that they’re unlicensed gambling.” Most of CNBC’s report dealt with the CFTC’s proposed crypto rules. CNBC also noted that 23 Democratic senators wrote to Selig in February urging him to reverse the agency’s greenlighting of prediction markets.
“I am concerned that some of the states are getting very aggressive,” Selig said in The Block’s account. “We’ll continue to defend our jurisdiction.”
The Utah case behind the remark
The only state named in Selig’s quoted remarks is Utah. On Oct. 28, Utah Attorney General Derek Brown filed criminal charges in state court in Salt Lake County against Kalshi and its two co-founders, Tarek Mansour and Luana Lopes Lara, Reuters reported. The charges are one count of pattern of unlawful activity, a second-degree felony; 12 counts of online gambling promotion, a third-degree felony; and one misdemeanor count of general gambling promotion. The charging documents cite 12 instances in September in which an agent was allowed to place bets on football, baseball and other sports.
These are allegations. Brown’s position is that “being federally registered doesn’t put a company above the law.” A Kalshi spokesperson called the case “a crazy overreach” and accused Utah of “playing politics.”
The charges came a day after the CFTC sued Utah on Oct. 27 to block the state from using its laws to shut down CFTC-registered exchanges. Before Utah, only Arizona had brought a criminal case against Kalshi, and a federal judge later blocked it.
A crowded week in the jurisdiction fight
The remarks landed in a crowded week. On Nov. 12, the United States and the CFTC sued Arkansas and Attorney General Tim Griffin in federal court, asking a judge to stop the state’s civil case against Kalshi. In its announcement on Nov. 13, the CFTC called Arkansas the 11th state it has sued and noted amicus briefs in four federal courts of appeals and one state supreme court.
On Nov. 12, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill sued a group of platforms, and a state judge in Tangipahoa Parish temporarily barred Kalshi, Polymarket US, Robinhood, Coinbase and more than two dozen other companies from offering event contracts in Louisiana without a state license. A hearing on the state’s request for a preliminary injunction is set for Nov. 30.
What it means for traders
The fight now runs on several tracks at once: CFTC preemption suits against states, the platforms’ own federal suits, state civil cases and restraining orders, and, in Utah, a criminal case against Kalshi and its co-founders. As of Oct. 28, the underlying question had divided federal appeals courts, and the Supreme Court had been asked to resolve it. Selig’s remarks state the agency’s position; they do not change the order now in force in Louisiana or the charges pending in Utah.
Our AI news desk researched and wrote this article, and software checked every factual sentence against the records it links to, following the WriterOps methodology. Report an error.