U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
New York federal court order refusing Kalshi an injunction pending appeal
No. 1:25-cv-08846 · ECF No. 113 · 3 pages
Entered
Court orderEmergency injunction denied
Cite this page
Bluebook
Kalshi v. New York: Order Denying Kalshi's Emergency Injunction (July 27, 2026), Prediction Market Laws (last updated Nov. 7, 2026), https://predictionmarketlaws.com/documents/sdny-kalshi-v-williams-order-injunction-pending-appeal.
APA
Prediction Market Laws. (2026, November 7). Kalshi v. New York: Order Denying Kalshi's Emergency Injunction (July 27, 2026). https://predictionmarketlaws.com/documents/sdny-kalshi-v-williams-order-injunction-pending-appeal
Three weeks after denying Kalshi a preliminary injunction, Judge Analisa Torres also refused to stop New York from enforcing its gaming laws while Kalshi appeals. Kalshi had shown nothing new, she wrote: a proposed CFTC rule claiming preemption does not change the court's reading of the statute, and Kalshi's harms are mostly the ordinary costs of complying with state law.
What the court decided
- A high bar. An earlier denial of a preliminary injunction carries significant weight, so only unusual circumstances justify changing course.
- Preemption. The court had already held that the Commodity Exchange Act does not preempt all state gambling laws as applied to swaps. A proposed CFTC rulemaking asserting express preemption does not change that, because the court interprets the statute itself.
- Harm. Kalshi's claimed harms are mainly monetary compliance costs. The risk to its federal registration as a contract market is speculative.
- Equities. The balance of hardships and the public interest favor New York, which identified significant harms from halting enforcement of its gaming rules.
“Plaintiff's request for an emergency injunction pending appeal is DENIED.”
Why it matters
Kalshi's appeal is pending at the Second Circuit (No. 26-1835). The case began with the New York State Gaming Commission's cease-and-desist letter of Oct. 24, 2025.
Where it fits in the case
Kalshi v. New York (S.D.N.Y.)U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 1:25-cv-08846
- New York State Gaming Commission sends Kalshi a cease-and-desist letter; the state later stipulates not to enforce it pending the PI ruling.
- Complaint filed.
- Judge Analisa Torres denies Kalshi's TRO and preliminary-injunction motion.
- Judge Analisa Torres denies Kalshi's motion (filed July 15, 2026) for an injunction pending appeal; New York's Attorney General says the state will not seek civil penalties while the dispute is resolved. This order
Read and cite it
Cite the order
KalshiEX LLC v. Williams, No. 1:25-cv-08846-AT, ECF No. 113 (S.D.N.Y. July 27, 2026).
Cite this summary
Prediction Market Laws, New York federal court order refusing Kalshi an injunction pending appeal (read Nov. 7, 2026), https://predictionmarketlaws.com/documents/sdny-kalshi-v-williams-order-injunction-pending-appeal.