Saunders_to_publish_final_v2

Historically, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) employed a strict framework in which only prediction markets for research and academic value were permitted. This framework rejected political event contracts. In September 2024, a ruling from U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit as well as recent press releases from the Trump Administration have signaled a paradigm shift in the acceptance and legitimacy of prediction markets. This industry seized the moment and began offering event contracts over a broad swath of events including sports. These commercial platforms say their ability to offer sports-related event contracts are governed by the CFTC. However, the industry’s position has drawn opposition from both state and Tribal Gaming Commissions, who view sports-related event contracts as sports gambling and subject to state law. This has led to an increase in legislation initiated by state and Tribal gaming regulators. This Note argues that sports-related event contracts are gambling and that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Murphy v. NCAA prevents federal law from preempting state and Tribal gaming commissions from regulating these contracts.

PDF: https://journals.law.unc.edu/ncjolt/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2026/04/Saunders_to_publish_final_v2.pdf

Author: Jalen Saunders

Volume 27, Issue 4