Prediction Markets Weekly: Kalshi’s MLB Moves and New York Times Spat — What It Means for Video Poker Players

The ongoing regulatory battle over prediction markets took another turn this week as Kalshi, the federally regulated exchange, advanced its MLB event contracts and became embroiled in a public disagreement with The New York Times. While these developments focus on sports betting-style contracts, they carry implications that extend into the broader gaming landscape, including the legal framework for skill-based games like video poker.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a unanimous 3-0 decision on Friday opposing sports event contracts, a ruling that directly challenges Kalshi’s ability to offer such products. The decision adds a layer of legal uncertainty to the prediction market industry, which has been navigating a patchwork of federal and state regulations.

Por que importa

Kalshi’s MLB contracts, which allow users to wager on outcomes of baseball games, represent a significant expansion of the platform’s offerings. The New York Times recently published a critical piece examining the potential risks of these contracts, prompting a public response from Kalshi. The exchange argued that its products are distinct from traditional sports betting because they are based on event outcomes rather than game spreads or odds.

For the video poker community, these developments are more than a distant regulatory squabble. The legal arguments being tested in the prediction market arena often parallel those used to distinguish skill-based games from games of chance. Video poker, which requires strategic decision-making and knowledge of probability, has long been classified as a game of skill in many jurisdictions. The same legal reasoning that supports Kalshi’s claim that its event contracts are not gambling could reinforce the argument that video poker is not gambling either.

Key facts
| Fact | Detail |
|——|——–|
| Ninth Circuit ruling | 3-0 decision opposing sports event contracts |
| Kalshi’s move | MLB event contracts launched on the platform |
| Public dispute | Kalshi pushed back against a New York Times article critical of its products |
| Broader relevance | Legal precedent may affect classification of skill-based games like video poker |

The regulatory environment for prediction markets remains fluid. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has historically taken a cautious stance, and the Ninth Circuit’s ruling could prompt further federal scrutiny. Meanwhile, Kalshi continues to operate under its existing regulatory framework, arguing that its contracts fall within the bounds of permitted event derivatives.

Why this matters for video poker players
The distinction between gambling and skill-based gaming is at the heart of many legal battles across the United States. If prediction markets can successfully argue that their products are based on skill and knowledge rather than chance, it could provide a powerful legal precedent for video poker advocates. Courts and regulators that accept this logic may be more inclined to protect video poker from being lumped together with slot machines and other pure-chance games.

The Ninth Circuit’s decision is not the final word. The case may be appealed or lead to legislative action. For now, the outcome serves as a reminder that the legal landscape for all forms of gaming — including video poker — is shaped by decisions made in courts and agencies far removed from casino floors.

Uncertainty remains
It is important to note that the Ninth Circuit ruling specifically addressed sports event contracts, not skill-based card games. The legal reasoning may not translate directly, and the final impact on video poker regulation is speculative at this stage. Readers should treat this as a contextual development rather than a confirmed shift in policy.

Source: SBC Americas — https://sbcamericas.com/2026/08/28/prediction-markets-weekly-august-28/

Datos clave