Kalshi’s battle with Massachusetts regulators has entered a new phase after a Superior Court judge gave the platform only a short window to comply with the state’s gambling laws. This case could mark a significant milestone in the ongoing efforts to determine whether federally regulated event contracts can continue to offer sports-related markets in jurisdictions that view such products as unlicensed wagering.
Kalshi Originally Pushed for a 90-Day Timeframe
Judge Christopher K. Barry-Smith announced this week that Kalshi must implement a solution to block Massachusetts residents from accessing its sports contracts within 30 days. The court rejected Kalshi’s plea for a 90-day grace period, reflecting its growing skepticism regarding Kalshi’s argument that its offerings are outside the reach of state gambling statutes.
The ongoing disputes revolve around a January 20 ruling that blocked Kalshi from operating sports prediction markets in Massachusetts without a state license. The company attempted to challenge this move in court. However, Judge Barry-Smith granted Massachusetts’ request for a preliminary injunction, forcing Kalshi to deploy geofencing technology that blocks Massachusetts users from placing new sports-related trades.
According to the newest ruling, open contracts will be unaffected. The court allowed users to exit their existing positions, reasoning that selling or settling contracts is part of the original transaction process. However, attempts to modify existing stakes will not be permitted. While this decision aims to minimize disruptions, it also seems to enforce the state’s position that sports prediction contracts constitute sports wagering.
The Platform Remains Mired in Legal Challenges
Judge Barry-Smith offered Kalshi a consolation prize, as he declined to restrict the company’s broader marketing efforts. Since the platform offers a diverse selection of contracts, ranging from economic indicators to political outcomes, advertising campaigns can continue. Massachusetts is effectively setting a firm boundary around sports markets, rather than attempting to shut the platform out entirely.
Kalshi and Massachusetts must now collaborate to submit a proposed injunction by February 4, 2026. If the two parties cannot reach an agreement, they may present their individual ideas to the court. A ruling on Kalshi’s emergency request for a stay of the injunction will also happen at this time.
Overall, Kalshi faces nineteen federal lawsuits throughout the USA. Eight challenges, filed by tribes and state regulators, claim that Kalshi is offering unlicensed gambling. Kalshi has, in turn, filed six lawsuits against local gaming authorities, accusing them of overstepping their authority. The remaining cases were filed by individuals who allege the platform fuels gambling addiction.
Kalshi’s battle with Massachusetts regulators has entered a new phase after a Superior Court judge gave the platform only a short window to comply with the state’s gambling laws. This case could mark a significant milestone in the ongoing efforts to determine whether federally regulated event contracts can continue to offer sports-related markets in jurisdictions