[12/10/22 EDIT] It should be possible to access the market legally from within the US.
[9/8/24 EDIT] "Who will win the 2024 US presidential election?", "Who will be POTUS on 2025/1/21?" and similar would count. Markets about Congress wouldn't count.
[9/13/24 EDIT] There shouldn't be too much uncertainty about the market's legality. I'm choosing to operationalize that as "the market should be continuously available in the US for ≥1 week (not counting technical issues like a server outage)".
1,000
3.00Will this continue to be the case? https://manifold.markets/NathanpmYoung/will-trading-on-the-kalshi-presiden
@nikki With my mod hat on I'm gonna say that while I endorse resolving I don't think someone is inactive for not resolving a market in the first few hours it could be resolved.
There shouldn't be too much uncertainty about the market's legality. I'm choosing to operationalize that as "the market should be continuously available in the US for ≥1 week (not counting technical issues like a server outage)".
I believe the markets launched at 8:15 ET last Friday. So it should resolve in less than 24 hours from now.
@agabara ahh I see -- missed that it needs to be live for a week... I knew it was live for days but didn't realize that was part of the ruleset
Interactive Brokers followed the same 1-day delay as Kalshi, & the criteria should be otherwise ~equivalent (1 week continuous operation). Any reason that one's currently lower? do people just think they're less committed to forcing it through?
Edit: now they ~match, for now. we'll see if that sticks
https://kalshi.com/markets/pres/presidential-elections the countdown is back (for tmrw)
Interesting they kept the "Trump v Harris" URL
https://kalshi.com/live/trump-v-harris
But not showing Trump v Harris countdown anymore.. Hmm...
Kalshi keep posting they will have election markets... today
https://x.com/Kalshi/status/1841843271389020242
The ongoing court case pertains to Kalshi's listing of House and Senate contracts and their subsequent suspensions by CFTC.
Accordingly, the Court concludes that Kalshi’s congressional control contracts do not involve unlawful activity or gaming. And thus the Court has no occasion to consider whether they are contrary to the public interest.
But the favorable district court judgment is completely applicable to Presidential market even though that was not what triggered the case.
Kalshi’s event contracts ask buyers to take a yes/no position on whether a chamber of Congress will be controlled by a specific party in a given term. That question involves (relates to, entails, has as its essential feature, or any other iteration of the word) elections, politics, Congress, and party control; but nothing that any Party to this litigation has identified as illegal or unlawful activity. Nor does that question bear any relation to any game—played for stakes or otherwise.
My view is the only reason Kalshi might fail to list presidential contract if they win on the injunction/appeal is if CFTC rejects the listing and uses its 90 day review window to run out the clock until after the election. I do not think it's likely because Kalshi/court/CFTC's legal arguments do not distinguish between presidential and congressional contracts at all.
Another possibility is Kalshi chooses not to list presidential market to avoid more CFTC battle or for business/PR reasons. I think this is low probability. The Trump vs Harris market would be a game changer for Kalshi as a business.
Therefore it really comes down to whether Kalshi is able to beat the injunction, that's it. I'm not legal expert but that's my view after doing some reading.
@NathanpmYoung They have on their website kalshi.com/elections showing a “Who will win the election” with photos of Trump and Harris saying “Coming Soon”