Kalshi seeks en banc review after losing six federal judges

Gaming attorney Daniel Wallach said Wednesday that Kalshi's petition for a full Ninth Circuit panel to rehear its sports-event contract case is unlikely to succeed, but argued the filing serves a different purpose: slowing state enforcement action while the company protects access to California and Texas.

Kalshi lost before all six federal judges who have considered the question. The most recent ruling gave Blue Lake Rancheria and Chicken Ranch Rancheria a preliminary injunction on grounds that Kalshi's contracts violate the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Kalshi has now asked for en banc reconsideration of that tribal ruling.

Wallach, speaking on the Indian Gaming Association's New Normal webinar, said the petition is designed to keep the Ninth Circuit ruling from becoming final, which may discourage states from pursuing civil or criminal enforcement on the Nevada model. He does not expect California Attorney General Rob Bonta to move against Kalshi directly, partly because of Bonta's law firm's involvement in the Paramount-Warner Bros merger settlement.