Robinhood
Derivatives filed a federal lawsuit yesterday (Monday) seeking to block
Massachusetts regulators from enforcing state gambling laws against its sports
prediction market operations, jumping into a broader legal fight over who
controls event-based trading platforms.
According
to Bloomberg
Law, the trading subsidiary of Robinhood Markets (NASDAQ: HOOD) sued
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell and five Gaming Commission
officials in federal court, arguing the state lacks authority to regulate its
$1 billion quarterly trading volume in sports-related event contracts.
Robinhood’s
legal challenge comes three days after Campbell
sued prediction market platform Kalshi for allegedly operating an
unlicensed sports betting service in the state. The company offers customers
access to sports event contracts through a partnership with Kalshi, which operates
under federal oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
“Sports
wagering comes with significant risk of addiction and financial loss and must
be strictly regulated to mitigate public health consequences,” said AG
Campbell. “This lawsuit will ensure that if Kalshi wants to be in the sports
gaming business in Massachusetts, they must obtain a license and follow our
laws. I am grateful for the ongoing partnership with the Gaming Commission.”
The lawsuit
represents the latest escalation in a nationwide dispute over whether states
can regulate federally approved prediction markets. Federal
courts in Nevada and New Jersey have ruled in favor of platforms like
Kalshi, while a Maryland
judge recently sided with state regulators.
You may
also like: Robinhood
Files Fund to Let Retail Investors Buy into Private Firms
Business Protection Drives
Legal Action
Robinhood
argues it had no alternative but to seek federal court protection after
Massachusetts explicitly referenced the company in its lawsuit against Kalshi.
The state alleged roughly $1 billion worth of Kalshi
contracts traded through Robinhood’s platform during the second quarter alone.
“There
is a real and imminent threat that Massachusetts will file a similar complaint
and motion against Robinhood,” the company stated in court filings. The
lawsuit warns that enforcement action would expose Robinhood to civil and
potentially criminal penalties while causing immediate reputational damage.
Preemption Claims
Challenge State Authority
The
company’s central legal argument rests on federal preemption under the
Commodity Exchange Act, which grants the CFTC “exclusive
jurisdiction” over derivatives trading on approved exchanges. Robinhood
contends that because all actual trades occur on Kalshi’s federally regulated
platform, state gambling laws cannot apply.
Massachusetts
takes a different view, arguing that prediction markets constitute sports
betting that requires state licensing regardless of federal oversight.
Gaming
attorney Daniel Wallach noted that Robinhood chose to file in federal court
rather than intervene in the pending state case against Kalshi, describing the
move as “forum-shopping” to avoid more stringent legal analysis.
Jurisdictional Fight
Spreads Nationwide
The
Massachusetts dispute adds to mounting legal conflicts over prediction market
regulation across multiple states. Nevada, Maryland, and New Jersey courts have
all examined whether federal commodities law trumps state gambling authority,
producing split decisions that may eventually require Supreme Court resolution.
Five other
states with legal sports betting have issued cease-and-desist orders against
Kalshi, while the platform has won preliminary relief in some jurisdictions.
The outcome of these cases will determine whether prediction markets can
operate nationwide under federal oversight or must navigate a patchwork of
state gambling regulations.
Robinhood
did not hold back, and at the end of August it
sued Nevada and New Jersey, alleging that it faces an “immediate threat of
civil penalties and criminal prosecution” in both states.
Robinhood
Derivatives filed a federal lawsuit yesterday (Monday) seeking to block
Massachusetts regulators from enforcing state gambling laws against its sports
prediction market operations, jumping into a broader legal fight over who
controls event-based trading platforms.
According
to Bloomberg
Law, the trading subsidiary of Robinhood Markets (NASDAQ: HOOD) sued
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell and five Gaming Commission
officials in federal court, arguing the state lacks authority to regulate its
$1 billion quarterly trading volume in sports-related event contracts.
Robinhood’s
legal challenge comes three days after Campbell
sued prediction market platform Kalshi for allegedly operating an
unlicensed sports betting service in the state. The company offers customers
access to sports event contracts through a partnership with Kalshi, which operates
under federal oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
“Sports
wagering comes with significant risk of addiction and financial loss and must
be strictly regulated to mitigate public health consequences,” said AG
Campbell. “This lawsuit will ensure that if Kalshi wants to be in the sports
gaming business in Massachusetts, they must obtain a license and follow our
laws. I am grateful for the ongoing partnership with the Gaming Commission.”
The lawsuit
represents the latest escalation in a nationwide dispute over whether states
can regulate federally approved prediction markets. Federal
courts in Nevada and New Jersey have ruled in favor of platforms like
Kalshi, while a Maryland
judge recently sided with state regulators.
You may
also like: Robinhood
Files Fund to Let Retail Investors Buy into Private Firms
Business Protection Drives
Legal Action
Robinhood
argues it had no alternative but to seek federal court protection after
Massachusetts explicitly referenced the company in its lawsuit against Kalshi.
The state alleged roughly $1 billion worth of Kalshi
contracts traded through Robinhood’s platform during the second quarter alone.
“There
is a real and imminent threat that Massachusetts will file a similar complaint
and motion against Robinhood,” the company stated in court filings. The
lawsuit warns that enforcement action would expose Robinhood to civil and
potentially criminal penalties while causing immediate reputational damage.
Preemption Claims
Challenge State Authority
The
company’s central legal argument rests on federal preemption under the
Commodity Exchange Act, which grants the CFTC “exclusive
jurisdiction” over derivatives trading on approved exchanges. Robinhood
contends that because all actual trades occur on Kalshi’s federally regulated
platform, state gambling laws cannot apply.
Massachusetts
takes a different view, arguing that prediction markets constitute sports
betting that requires state licensing regardless of federal oversight.
Gaming
attorney Daniel Wallach noted that Robinhood chose to file in federal court
rather than intervene in the pending state case against Kalshi, describing the
move as “forum-shopping” to avoid more stringent legal analysis.
Jurisdictional Fight
Spreads Nationwide
The
Massachusetts dispute adds to mounting legal conflicts over prediction market
regulation across multiple states. Nevada, Maryland, and New Jersey courts have
all examined whether federal commodities law trumps state gambling authority,
producing split decisions that may eventually require Supreme Court resolution.
Five other
states with legal sports betting have issued cease-and-desist orders against
Kalshi, while the platform has won preliminary relief in some jurisdictions.
The outcome of these cases will determine whether prediction markets can
operate nationwide under federal oversight or must navigate a patchwork of
state gambling regulations.
Robinhood
did not hold back, and at the end of August it
sued Nevada and New Jersey, alleging that it faces an “immediate threat of
civil penalties and criminal prosecution” in both states.