Resolution criteria

• For each judge option, resolve YES if that judge votes for an outcome that leaves Kalshi protected from New Jersey enforcement in the Third Circuit appeal KalshiEX LLC v. Flaherty, No. 25-1922 (i.e., votes to affirm the district court’s preliminary injunction or otherwise grant relief in Kalshi’s favor). A concurrence or dissent explicitly taking Kalshi’s side counts as YES. Otherwise NO. If the appeal is dismissed or mooted without a judge-by-judge merits vote, that option resolves N/A. Source of truth: the Third Circuit docket and the filed opinion. (dockets.justia.com, digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu)

• If the case is reheard en banc, resolve based on the en banc judgment and individual votes; panel votes are superseded. Use the final judgment/opinion as posted by the court. (ca3.uscourts.gov)

Background

• The District of New Jersey granted a preliminary injunction on April 28, 2025, restraining NJ regulators from enforcing against Kalshi’s sports-related event contracts and required a $100,000 bond; NJ appealed. The Third Circuit expedited the appeal and calendared it for the panel sitting the week of September 8, 2025. (hklaw.com, dockets.justia.com)

• This New Jersey case is separate from Kalshi’s federal fight with the CFTC in D.C.; the CFTC voluntarily dismissed its appeal on May 5, 2025, leaving the district court’s pro‑Kalshi ruling in place. (reuters.com, cnbc.com)

• Judge bios (relevant if these are added as answers):

  • Michael A. Chagares — Chief Judge, 3d Cir. (since 2021), appointed 2006 (G.W. Bush). (ca3.uscourts.gov, fjc.gov)

  • David J. Porter — 3d Cir. judge since 2018 (Trump). (fjc.gov)

  • Jane R. Roth — Senior 3d Cir. judge since 2006; on the court since 1991 (G.H.W. Bush). (fjc.gov)

Considerations

• Panel assignments are not final until shortly before argument and can change; senior judges may sit by designation. If a named judge is not on the panel, they could still vote if the case goes en banc. (ca3.uscourts.gov)

• Dispositions can include “affirm,” “reverse,” “vacate,” or “remand.” Treat outcomes that dissolve or narrow the injunction as against Kalshi; outcomes that preserve or expand relief as for Kalshi. Verify via the judgment/opinion on the court’s docket/opinion archive. (dockets.justia.com, digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu)