Resolution criteria

• This resolves “Yes” if the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issues a decision in Kalshiex LLC v. Martin et al. (No. 25-1892) that grants Kalshi the relief it seeks on appeal (e.g., reverses or vacates the district court’s denial of injunctive relief or otherwise rules in Kalshi’s favor). “No” if the Fourth Circuit affirms the district court or dismisses the appeal without granting Kalshi relief. Published or unpublished opinions count. If the appeal is dismissed (including voluntarily) without relief to Kalshi, resolves “No.” Sources for resolution: Fourth Circuit opinions page and the case docket. (dockets.justia.com)

• Where to check: Fourth Circuit opinions list (search for “Kalshiex LLC v. Martin, No. 25-1892”) and the docket summary. (dockets.justia.com)

Background

• Maryland’s gaming regulators sent Kalshi a cease‑and‑desist over its sports event contracts. On Aug 6, 2025, Kalshi appealed the District of Maryland’s denial of a preliminary injunction to the Fourth Circuit (No. 25-1892). (dockets.justia.com)

• The district court’s order denying a preliminary injunction is available on Justia; the appeal is now the vehicle to decide whether the Commodity Exchange Act preempts Maryland’s enforcement. (law.justia.com)

• Separately, Kalshi prevailed against the CFTC on election markets; the CFTC dropped its D.C. Circuit appeal on May 5, 2025, leaving the district court’s ruling in Kalshi’s favor in place. That dispute is distinct from the Maryland case. (cnbc.com)

Considerations

• The Fourth Circuit case centers on federal preemption vs. state gambling authority; a decision could be narrow (e.g., limited to sports event contracts) and not address election markets. (natlawreview.com)

• Maryland has agreed to pause enforcement pending the Fourth Circuit’s decision, but that pause does not affect how this market resolves. (covers.com, sccgmanagement.com)