U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
New Jersey federal court opinion granting Kalshi an injunction
No. 1:25-cv-02152 · ECF No. 21 · 16 pages
Entered
Court opinionPreliminary injunction granted
Cite this page
Bluebook
Kalshi v. New Jersey Injunction (April 28, 2025): What Judge Kiel Decided, Prediction Market Laws (last updated Nov. 7, 2026), https://predictionmarketlaws.com/documents/d-nj-kalshi-v-flaherty-preliminary-injunction.
APA
Prediction Market Laws. (2026, November 7). Kalshi v. New Jersey Injunction (April 28, 2025): What Judge Kiel Decided. https://predictionmarketlaws.com/documents/d-nj-kalshi-v-flaherty-preliminary-injunction
Judge Edward S. Kiel barred New Jersey's Division of Gaming Enforcement from enforcing the state's sports-wagering laws against Kalshi. He found that Kalshi's sports event contracts likely fall within the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction because Kalshi is a federally designated contract market, and that Kalshi had a reasonable chance of winning on field preemption. He set a $100,000 bond.
What the court held
- Exclusive federal jurisdiction. The Commodity Exchange Act gives the CFTC authority over swaps and similar contracts traded on designated contract markets, and the savings clauses do not restore state power over them.
- Sports contracts are covered. The court rejected the argument that sporting events lack a financial or economic consequence.
- Field preemption is enough. Kalshi showed a reasonable chance of success on field preemption, so the court did not reach conflict preemption.
- Gaming concerns go to the CFTC. The Act's special rule for event contracts routes public-interest concerns about gaming to CFTC review, not to state gaming enforcement.
- Irreparable harm. Kalshi showed likely harm to its reputation and goodwill. The court gave weight to a partner's decision not to list Kalshi contracts in New Jersey after receiving a similar cease-and-desist letter.
- Bond. The court set bond at $100,000, matching the maximum fine under New Jersey's sports-wagering law.
“Kalshi's sports-related event contracts fall within the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction.”
Why it matters
The Third Circuit affirmed this injunction on April 6, 2026, and New Jersey's Supreme Court petition (No. 26-299) asks the justices to reverse it.
Where it fits in the case
Kalshi v. New Jersey (D.N.J.)U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, 1:25-cv-02152
- Complaint and TRO/PI motion filed.
- Court grants TRO and preliminary injunction. This opinion
- State defendants appeal to the Third Circuit.
- Proceedings stayed pending the Third Circuit mandate.
- Third Circuit affirms the preliminary injunction.
Read and cite it
Cite the opinion
KalshiEX LLC v. Flaherty, No. 25-cv-02152-ESK-MJS, ECF No. 21 (D.N.J. Apr. 28, 2025).
Cite this summary
Prediction Market Laws, New Jersey federal court opinion granting Kalshi an injunction (read Nov. 7, 2026), https://predictionmarketlaws.com/documents/d-nj-kalshi-v-flaherty-preliminary-injunction.