CFTC moves to drop Kalshi appeal in election betting dispute
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is stepping back from its appeal in the high-profile legal case over election betting markets.
On Monday (May 5), the CFTC filed a motion asking the US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to dismiss its appeal against Kalshi, a company that’s been trying to launch a regulated market where people can bet on which party will control Congress.
The CFTC had previously blocked Kalshi’s plan, leading to the legal showdown. Now, it looks like the agency is ready to drop the fight, at least for now.
In its filing, the CFTC requested that “this appeal be voluntarily dismissed, on terms agreed upon by the parties in the attached Joint Stipulation.” The agency confirmed that “each party will bear its own costs, court fees and attorney fees incurred in the proceedings before this Court, the district court, and in administrative proceedings before the Commission.”
Kalshi, the trading platform at the center of the case, is also on board with the decision. According to the Joint Stipulation, Kalshi has waived “any and all claims relating to or arising from litigation of this matter” under both the Equal Access to Justice Act and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.
As part of the deal, Kalshi agreed to waivers that rule out any chance of the company seeking compensation for legal fees or claiming the CFTC overstepped its regulatory authority.
The motion was filed jointly by Anne W. Stukes, representing the CFTC, and Amanda K. Rice of the law firm Jones Day, representing Kalshi. Both attorneys stressed that while this move brings an end to this particular legal battle, it doesn’t settle the larger debate around the regulation of election betting markets.
Battle between Kalshi and the CFTC is not overThere’s a pretty decent chance that the D.C. Circuit will refuse to dismiss the CFTC v. Kalshi appeal, even on consent. The appeal has been fully briefed, orally argued (months ago) and a draft opinion has probably already been circulated.
There is a case directly on point.