Arkansas Sues Kalshi Over Sports Contracts as Courts Leave State Gambling Laws in Force

On November 4, 2026, Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin filed a civil lawsuit against KalshiEX LLC and Kalshi Inc in state court. According to PYMNTS, citing the attorney general's press release, the companies accepted wagersВейджерWagering requirement (wagering) is a bonus condition that sets how many times the bonus amount must be bet before winnings can be withdrawn. It is usually written as a multiplier, for example x30. on sporting and entertainment events without the licenses and oversight required of gambling operatorsОператорAn operator in gambling and betting is the company that holds the license and runs a casino or bookmaker platform, and is responsible for players and the payments made to them. and did not pay applicable taxes. The suit comes amid a series of federal appellate rulings in recent weeks that have left states free to apply their laws to Kalshi's sports contracts.

What Kalshi Is Accused Of

Griffin sued under Arkansas's Deceptive Trade Practices Act and seeks restitution, penalties, unpaid taxes and an injunction. Citing Ars Technica, which PYMNTS also cited, Kalshi admitted customers as young as 18, while Arkansas requires users to be at least 21 to open electronic wagering accounts. In the press release, Griffin pointed to Kalshi's depositДепозитA deposit is a transfer of money from a player or customer to their account with a casino, sportsbook, or exchange operator. Once the funds are credited, they become available for betting or trading. limits, self-exclusionСамоисключениеSelf-exclusion is a voluntary ban that lets a player block their own access to gambling services for a chosen period or permanently. tools and promotion of gambling addiction resources as evidence that the company recognizes risks familiar to gambling regulators. Kalshi called the allegations baseless and said Congress created a single federal regulator so exchanges could operate under nationwide rules.

Court Backdrop

The lawsuit adds to a long-running disputeДиспутDispute: a formal claim by a customer against a bank, payment system or operator over a disputed transaction, payout or bet, reviewed under established rules. over the status of sports contracts. On November 3, 2026, the 2nd Circuit denied requests from Kalshi and Coinbase to block state enforcement while their appeals proceed. The order covered Kalshi's cases against New York and Connecticut officials and Coinbase's separate case against Connecticut. The next day, the 9th Circuit declinedОтказ платежаPayment decline is a situation where a transaction fails authorization: the issuing bank, acquirer, payment service provider or anti-fraud system rejects the charge or top-up. to rehear its August decision that allowed Nevada to enforce its gambling laws against Kalshi's sports contracts. That panel held that such contracts do not fall under the federal definition of swaps.

In September, the 6th Circuit cleared Ohio and Tennessee to enforce their laws. The court found that Kalshi had failed to show its contracts qualified as swaps and that, even if they did, federal law would allow states to apply their own gambling rules. In Utah, criminal charges have been brought against Kalshi and its founders under the state's gambling ban, and a federal judge there has already declined to block local enforcement. The Commodity FuturesФьючерсыA futures contract is a standardized exchange-traded contract to buy or sell an asset at a price agreed in advance, on a set date in the future. Trading Commission, the federal regulator, has sued Utah and nine other states and is participating as a party in appeals.

A Split in Rulings and the Supreme Court Question

The CFTC's biggest win came in April, when the 3rd Circuit ruled that Kalshi's sports contracts are swaps and that the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction barred New Jersey from applying its gambling laws to those trades. New Jersey has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review that decision, and the petition is supported by 39 other states and the District of Columbia. While it is pending, exchanges face different enforcement outcomes depending on the state.

The Arkansas case shows that more is at stake than whether a platform can offerОфферAn offer is an advertiser's proposal to partners: the product together with payout terms, geos, and traffic requirements, for which the partner receives a reward. sports contracts. By suing under a consumer protection statute and seeking money as well as an injunction, the state is pursuing liability for transactions the company has already accepted.