Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel won a preliminary injunction that further limits Kalshi from offering sports-related contracts to Michigan residents, building on an earlier temporary restraining order. Judge Rosemarie Aquilina described Kalshi as "a sports betting operation masquerading as an investment opportunity," supporting the state's argument that state gambling laws apply. Kalshi disputes the ruling, argues for federal jurisdiction, plans to challenge the order and is implementing geolocation and other restrictions while litigation proceeds.
Michigan AG Scores Win: Court Restricts Kalshi’s Sports Contracts, Labels Platform ‘Sports Betting Operation’
Photo Credit: Getty Images
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel secured another court victory in her challenge to prediction-market operator Kalshi after an Ingham County judge issued a preliminary injunction further restricting the platform’s ability to offer sports-related contracts to Michigan residents.
The case centers on whether Kalshi’s fast-moving online contracts should be treated as financial instruments under federal law or as state-regulated sports wagering. The dispute, filed in March, alleges Kalshi operated unlicensed sports betting in Michigan without authorization from the Michigan Gaming Control Board.
Ingham County Circuit Judge Rosemarie Aquilina expanded an earlier temporary restraining order with a preliminary injunction that formalizes limits on Kalshi’s sports-related activity in the state while litigation continues. In her order, Judge Aquilina wrote that Kalshi is "a sports betting operation masquerading as an investment opportunity," language that reinforces Michigan’s position that state gambling laws should apply.
Key rulings and requirements
The injunction bars Kalshi from offering sports-betting-related contracts to Michigan residents and requires the company to employ a third-party geolocation provider to block in-state users from placing wagers.
The lawsuit also flagged age-related concerns: Michigan’s licensed sports betting is restricted to people 21 and older, but Kalshi users aged 18 to 20 can currently trade on the platform. That discrepancy was cited as part of the harm supporting the court’s earlier temporary restraining order.
Responses and next steps
Kalshi disputes the ruling and says the contracts fall under federal jurisdiction. Elisabeth Diana, Kalshi’s head of communications, said the company "disagrees with the state's decision and will fight it in court," adding that Kalshi would implement restrictions while pursuing appeals. In a letter to the attorney general, Kalshi attorney Andrew Porter pointed to similar jurisdictional questions raised by products from rivals such as Polymarket, Robinhood, Coinbase and Crypto.com.
Broader implications
The Michigan action could influence other attorneys general and state gaming regulators considering enforcement against prediction-market offerings. Regulators and policymakers are watching how courts resolve the overlap between securities- or commodity-style regulation and traditional gambling law—issues that touch licensing, age limits, consumer protections and how gambling revenue is distributed back into communities.
Context
- Advocates for stricter oversight cite concerns about underage users, predatory design, and the flow of gambling revenue.
- Industry observers note this litigation is part of a larger national debate about how emerging digital markets should be regulated.
- A final ruling or an appellate decision could shape how companies market, structure and limit sports-related contracts across multiple states.
Legal proceedings continue, and Kalshi has indicated it will challenge the injunction in court.
Help us improve.
