Massachusetts has moved to block Kalshi from offering sports-related prediction markets to residents, dealing a sharp setback to the fast-growing platform’s push into athletic outcomes.
A judge in Boston said the company cannot allow users in the state to place financial wagers tied to sporting events unless it secures proper approval under local wagering rules. The decision clears the way for a preliminary injunction that would halt Kalshi’s sports contracts in Massachusetts, making it the first state to formally seek — and win — such a restriction against the firm.
In a written ruling, the court stressed that oversight of sports wagering serves public safety interests and protects state revenues, concluding that Kalshi cannot sidestep those requirements by labeling its offerings as financial contracts. A follow-up hearing is scheduled to finalize the order and to consider whether enforcement should be paused if the company appeals.
State officials welcomed the decision, describing it as a firm reinforcement of Massachusetts’ gambling framework and a step toward limiting the social risks associated with unregulated betting.
Kalshi, based in New York, did not comment on the ruling but has previously said it would challenge any injunction. The platform allows users to trade on the outcomes of a wide range of events — from elections and economic indicators to pop culture and sports. Sports-related contracts, launched nationwide last year, have quickly grown into the largest slice of its activity.
Massachusetts officials argue that Kalshi effectively introduced sports wagering without approval, including access for users as young as 18 — a contrast to licensed operators in the state, which face stricter age limits and controls. The company counters that its products fall under federal oversight of derivatives markets and therefore sit outside state gambling rules.
The judge rejected that argument, saying federal authority over financial markets was never meant to erase state control over gambling. He noted that both systems can coexist, pointing to a similar outcome in another state where Kalshi recently failed to fend off comparable restrictions.
As disputes with regulators continue to stack up across the country, the Massachusetts decision signals growing resistance to Kalshi’s attempt to redraw the boundary between trading and betting — and suggests that more states may soon test that line themselves.
