Betting

Kalshi Sues Ohio in State Court Over $5M Betting Fine

Published

Kalshi has opened a new legal front against Ohio’s gambling regulator, suing the Ohio Casino Control Commission in state court to block a proposed $5 million penalty over its sports event contracts. The move marks a sharp pivot away from the federal preemption argument the company has used, with mixed results, in roughly a dozen other states.

A different argument this time

The new complaint, filed June 29, 2026, in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, doesn’t lean on Kalshi’s usual claim that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s oversight overrides state gambling law. Instead, Kalshi argues that the Ohio Constitution entitles it to a jury trial before the state can impose a civil penalty of this size, and that Ohio’s sports-gaming law doesn’t set out clear enough standards to support a financial penalty at all.

“The enforcement of a statutory penalty … must occur in a forum that affords a jury,” Kalshi’s complaint reads, asking the court for a permanent injunction and a declaration that Ohio’s enforcement violated state law. The Ohio Casino Control Commission told SBC Americas it could not comment on pending litigation.

The shift in strategy is notable. Rather than waiting on the slower federal appeals process to settle whether Washington’s commodities regulator can override state gambling law, Kalshi is now also asking an Ohio judge to strike at the penalty mechanism itself — a narrower question that doesn’t depend on how the broader preemption fight turns out.

Picking up where the federal case left off

The state filing follows a string of losses for Kalshi in its existing federal case. Chief Judge Sarah D. Morrison of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction on March 9, 2026, ruling that Kalshi’s sports contracts don’t meet the legal definition of swaps regulated by the CFTC. Kalshi appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which on April 24, 2026 denied the company’s bid to pause Ohio’s enforcement while that appeal moves forward, finding Kalshi had “failed to show enough at this stage” to justify blocking the state, while ordering the underlying appeal expedited. The CFTC itself later entered the case on Kalshi’s side, filing an amicus brief in May 2026 arguing its jurisdiction over event contracts is exclusive.

Just over a week before the April ruling, the Ohio Casino Control Commission had told Kalshi it intended to fine the company $5 million, citing several alleged violations:

  • Operating an unlicensed sportsbook in the state since around January 2025
  • Failing to pay Ohio’s 20% tax on sports-wagering revenue
  • Allowing users as young as 18 to trade contracts, despite Ohio’s sports-betting age limit of 21
  • Skipping the state’s standard self-exclusion program for problem gamblers

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost predicted at the time that Kalshi wouldn’t be operating in the state much longer.

The Sixth Circuit has since consolidated Ohio’s case with a similar dispute out of Tennessee, where a different federal judge sided with Kalshi, and will hear oral arguments on July 30, 2026.

Ohio joins a fractured map

Kalshi has won preliminary injunctions against state enforcement in California, New Jersey, and Tennessee, including an April 6, 2026 ruling from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals — the first federal appeals court to back the company’s preemption argument. But it has lost at the injunction stage in Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, and now Ohio, leaving a split between circuits that legal observers expect will eventually reach the Supreme Court. Licensed sportsbooks that pay Ohio’s taxes and licensing fees have pointed to that imbalance as proof Kalshi is competing on different terms than they are.

The same fight has pulled in Illinois and Kentucky, where Kalshi is suing over new licensing and tax measures, and Minnesota, which became the first state to ban prediction markets outright. In Ohio, state lawmakers have proposed a different fix: a bill from state Sen. Bill DeMora would bring sports event-contract trading under Ohio’s existing sports-betting license and tax rules rather than banning it, though the measure hasn’t advanced since being referred to committee in mid-May 2026.

For now, Kalshi’s $5 million penalty sits unresolved on two separate tracks: a federal appeal over whether the CFTC’s authority overrides Ohio’s gambling law, and a new state case asking an Ohio judge to decide whether the state can fine the company at all without first giving it a jury.

Elena Markov is an AI-generated analyst at Gaming.net, tracking regulatory developments, licensing decisions, and enforcement actions in major gambling jurisdictions worldwide. Her reporting centers on specific policy changes, fines, auditor findings, and legal interpretations affecting licensed operators.

Elena’s articles parse regulatory documents and enforcement notices from bodies such as the UK Gambling Commission, Malta Gaming Authority, and state regulators, explaining how these moves influence market access, operator obligations, and compliance costs. She foregrounds named regulators, actual rulings, timelines, and documented outcomes.
Articles authored by Elena Markov are AI-generated and reviewed by Gaming.net’s editorial team to ensure accuracy, clarity, and compliance-aware coverage of gambling regulation.