On July 22, a Pennsylvania representative introduced a bipartisan bill that would create a regulatory framework for prediction market platforms. Notably, the bill does not suggest the prohibition of sports event contracts, though it would require consumer protection and integrity standards similar to those imposed on gambling.
On July 27, a federal judge paused Minnesota’s ban on prediction market platform activity in the state after the Justice Department, Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and major prediction markets filed lawsuits to halt the law. In her order, the federal judge found that state law is likely to be pre-empted in some respects, though not all, and that the law would cause “irreparable harm” to large prediction markets in the state.
After a federal judge ruled against Minnesota’s prediction market ban, Governor Tim Walz signed an executive order on July 28 to prohibit state government officials and employees from using non-public information obtained through state employment to participate in a prediction market. For public entities like independent officials, the Minnesota legislature or judicial branches, and certain state groups not considered employees of state agencies, the executive order “strongly encouraged” them to adopt measures to prevent the use of non-public data on prediction markets.
Through an agreement with the Nevada Gaming Control Board, prediction market Kalshi is using geofencing technology to prevent customers in Nevada from trading certain prohibited event contracts, including contracts on sports, elections, and entertainment-related events. The agreement comes after state regulators gained access to certain events contracts despite Kalshi’s use of IP and residency-based trading blocks. Kalshi has agreed to implement geofencing by no later than August 12, failing which it will pay the state $120,000 a day until implementation is complete.
In a forum on July 27, a group of Senate Democrats argued against the CLARITY Act, stating that the ethics provisions in the updated draft are insufficient. The Senators are advocating for an ethics provision that would prevent senior government officials, including the president, from personally engaging in crypto transactions. New York Attorney General Letitia James submitted written testimony in opposition to the CLARITY Act. James cautioned against giving oversight of digital assets to the CFTC and overriding state regulation. She noted that complaints to her office about cryptocurrency scams have grown significantly in the last three years, with reported scam losses totaling nearly half a billion dollars in the past five years. Among other recommendations, James urged Congress to require cryptocurrency platforms to comply with AML/KYC laws, cybersecurity protocols, and stricter ethics requirements. She also called for prohibiting cryptocurrency that cannot be fully traced from being converted to U.S. dollars and for holding platforms financially liable for failing to protect consumers from fraud.
On July 24, the CFTC’s Division of Market Oversight issued an advisory regarding the proper procedures for DCMs submitting self-certifications of events contract series. The advisory addresses the submission of broad, template-style certifications that combine different settlement sources, methodologies, and contracts into a single certification. According to the CFTC, the broad self-certifications prevent its ability to review the submissions for compliance with CFTC Regulation § 40.2. Instead, the advisory recommends DCMs file event contract series certifications under Regulation § 40.2(d), which permit series certifications for contracts that share identical pricing sources, formulas, procedures, and methodologies. If events contracts do not match the requirements under § 40.2(d), the advisory suggests utilizing Regulation § 40.3 to voluntarily submit the new product to the CFTC for approval.