by superfrank
9 subcomments
- For the record, Minnesota currently has a complete ban on sports betting.
We've seen a couple other states that allow sports betting go after prediction markets. Personally, I feel that any state that allows sports betting is going to struggle to argue a case to ban prediction markets because you're essentially arguing over implementation details. Even arguments that certain prediction markets are ripe for insider trading or morally wrong fall a bit flat when you realize that traditional sportsbooks let you bet on things like college basketball player props and the little league world series.
I'm still not sure Minnesota will win their case, but it feels like that detail gives them a lot better chance of winning compared to many other states.
- This is great news. From my perspective from someone who grew up in the 90s, America feels like we took the turn towards Biff Tannen's Pleasure Paradise. A future very fa from our promise filled with gambling, social degradation, and worse economic prospects for everyone. Gambling sites like Polymarket are just a symptom. More states need to move in this direction, because its just a tax levied on the uninformed to insider cashing in
- The CFTC commission comprises five seats, four of which are currently vacant: https://www.cftc.gov/About/Commissioners/index.htm
- While it's obviously sports betting, the fact is that federal law gives the CFTC the power to determine what is and isn't a future and expressly preempts state intervention in futures markets. And, the case as to why futures markets generally should be subject only to federal oversight is quite strong IMO. So, the case can quickly become whether or not the CFTC should consider sports betting to be a future, and judges typically defer to the executive branch when it's not obvious (and in this case I don't think it is, the bar owner in Philly hedging an Eagles loss is an entirely plausible, albeit unlikely and uncommon, situation).
While I am partial to the argument that the CFTC is actually taking away the states' 10th Amendment police power right, that is a somewhat tenuous case in comparison to the enumerated right of the federal government to provide sole jurisdiction to the executive branch to enforce a law (and not to mention a law that impacts interstate commerce).
I imagine Minnesota loses this case and what's far more likely is either a more liberal congress changes what is a future by law or a more liberal executive branch reduces the protections for Kalshi et al.
- I could imagine cases where prediction markets could offer some actual insight, but in practice they seem few and far between. Most markets I've seen devolve into one or more of: betting on unimportant events (e.g. sports games), insider trading, or poorly written ambiguous resolution criteria. It's just hard for me to imagine that, on net, these markets will offer more societal good than the harm we've seen from sports betting.
by VikingCoder
1 subcomments
- Anyone taking bets on how that ban will last?
- as the article notes, prediction markets are regulated by the CFTC as a commodities futures contract, so I'm not sure how any state law survives a federal pre-emption challenge. On the other hand, it's a little unusual to see a federal agency suing to protect its turf. Would've expected a class action by a Minnesota user of the service to bring the challenge instead.
by 1899-12-30
0 subcomment
- *Minnesota becomes first state to ban the use of prediction markets as a loophole for sports gambling.
- What did the prediction markets predict for this? Theoretically, if they're good at predicting then they should have predicted they'd be banned
by everdrive
10 subcomments
- I wonder if it can really be enforced. It's clear that prediction markets are a scourge -- there seems to be no upside whatsoever.
by rebekkamikkoa
2 subcomments
- It’s hard to pretend this isn’t at least gambling-adjacent when most people are simply betting on outcomes.
by jimmygrapes
0 subcomment
- They're only doing this because they know Brock "Legnar" is gonna win at Summerslam
/s but not /s iykyk
- Cue in the talking heads to tell us how devastating this ban is.
by Robotbeat
1 subcomments
- Does this ban the prediction markets that don’t use real money but instead tokens that are worthless?
by kyledrake
3 subcomments
- They're not going to get rid of them, they're just going to drive them underground, which will make them impossible to regulate, which will make using them less safe. I don't participate in prediction markets, but I would bet everything I own on this outcome.
by steve1977
7 subcomments
- Isn't the stock market a prediction market as well?
by yamillove
1 subcomments
- It would be good if they banned Learing Centers.
by OsrsNeedsf2P
1 subcomments
- > The prohibition extends to services supporting prediction markets, like virtual private networks, that could allow consumers to disguise their location and get around the ban.
I'm sorry, what the fuck?
- Congrats Minnesota and good luck with enforcement.
- They've been banned for generations. It's called gambling.
Of course, we all have to sit through another round of Silicon Valley pretending they've discovered some new exciting business model that's just vice.
Unlicensed gypsy cabs, SROs, shift work, patent medicines, narcotics dealing, customs fraud, and smuggling already had established market entrants I guess.
by mghackerlady
0 subcomment
- Love it here, only sane state there is these days. Everywhere else is either brain dead, too hot, or too mean
by calvinmorrison
0 subcomment
- where did the lear about this?
by sergiotapia
2 subcomments
- There should be a ban on the instagram reels showing gambling like it's not a big deal. They are deliberately targeting teens and it's quite sickening.
If you work at one of these companies it's the same as working for a payday loan company. You are making blood money.
- Remember in the late 2010s when the hack Ajit Pai, then fCC Chair, said that the FCC couldn't or shouldn't enforce Obama-era Title 8 net neutrality? Remember how states like California then said "OK, it's not a federal issue so we'll do it at the state level"? Then remember how the DoJ, at the FCC's direction, sued California [1]?
Well, which is it? Was net neutrality a state or federal issue? The answer is it's, as always, a Schrodinger's STate's rights issue. That is, it's a "state's rights" issue when it suits them, a federal issue when it suits them and it's neither when it suits them. Lack of any kind of regulation is the goal. This isn't some libertarian pipe dream. It's just naked pro-company and pro-billionaire gutting of government to boost profits.
Fast forward to prediction markets. The CFTC regulates this (arguably). Another deregulation hack is in charge. And again, states like Minnesota who already ban sports betting are being sued. "State's rights" btw. We're seeing the exact same pattern.
This on the same day that the president who sued the IRS, which was defended by the president's DoJ and the recess appointee Attorney-General settled a $10 billion lawsuit right as a federal judge tosses it because the case lacked adversity [2].
Besides the J6 slush fund, part of this settlement is that the IRS is barred from ever investigating Trump, his family or the Trump Organization for tax fraud.
The level of corruption and kleptocracy here is beyond belief and what's really frightening is that a good 35-40% of the population not only don't care but actively support something they will never benefit from and there hasn't been (and won't be) any political price paid for any of it. The president's endorsement still carries weight and just today, we've had the most expensive Congressional primary in history (~$35 million) where Trump unseated a sitting Congressmen for daring to push for releasing the Epstein files.
[1]: https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-f...
[2]: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/insight/trump-eyes-1-776b-irs...
[3]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/05/19/...
- [flagged]
by SilverElfin
2 subcomments
- Doesn’t this violate commerce between states, effectively?
- They should ban the stock market as well then since the stock market is essentially just a prediction market.
by HoldOnAMinute
0 subcomment
- What a waste of time and energy
by tardedmeme
1 subcomments
- If a prediction market uses AI will this violate the federal ban on states impeding AI?
Hacker News