CFTC interim rule would shield casino products while binding prediction markets to swap law
The two rules the CFTC sent to the White House this week arrived without their full text. That is not unusual for OIRA submissions, but the sequencing tells you something about what the Commission is trying to accomplish and how fast it wants to get there.
The first rule, RIN 3038-AF82, would amend the regulatory definition of a "swap" under the Commodity Exchange Act to explicitly include event contracts. That goes through notice-and-comment, which means months of public record before anything is final. The second rule, RIN 3038-AF81, is an interim final rule — it excludes casino-style gambling products from that same swap definition, and it can take effect while comments are still being collected. The Commission classified both as not economically significant, which is a classification that affects the review timeline and not, it should be said, the legal consequences.
The structure of the two rules together is where the argument lives. If event contracts are swaps, the Commodity Exchange Act applies, and under the position CFTC Chairman Michael Selig has staked out, that authority is exclusive. States that have been pursuing prediction market operators in court — Ohio, Tennessee, New York, which sued Polymarket last week — would find themselves arguing against federal preemption rather than against the platforms directly. The interim carve-out for casino products is the consideration offered to the traditional gaming industry in exchange for its acquiescence to that framework. MGM and Caesars, whose chief executives said this week they will not enter prediction markets while Nevada's gaming board is watching, are the intended beneficiaries of that carve-out whether they asked for it or not.
The consensus read on this is that the OIRA submission represents the Commission taking its strongest run yet at locking in federal jurisdiction before the Supreme Court can rule on the circuit split between the Third and Ninth Circuits. I think that read misses a step. The interim final rule is the operative instrument here, not the proposed rule. A proposed rule that draws hostile comments and gets modified or withdrawn leaves the Commission where it started. An interim final rule that takes effect immediately creates a regulatory fact on the ground — one that courts reviewing subsequent state enforcement actions would have to address, even if they ultimately reject it. The Commission is not trying to win the Supreme Court argument by preempting it. It is trying to change what the Supreme Court would be reviewing.
Whether that strategy survives depends on whether courts treat the swap redefinition as a reasonable exercise of the Commission's authority under the CEA or as an attempt to accomplish through rulemaking what Congress never authorized. The Chevron doctrine's narrowed scope after the Supreme Court's 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo means agencies receive less deference on questions of statutory interpretation than they did five years ago. The CFTC is asking a reviewing court to accept that event contracts fall within a statutory definition of swaps that Congress wrote without prediction markets in mind.
Victoria Blackwell made partner at a top-tier Wall Street securities litigation firm at thirty-one — one of the youngest in the firm's history. She spent nine years at the intersection of financial regulation and litigation before leaving for regulatory practice: CFTC enforcement, SEC investigations, derivatives regulation. Victoria Blackwell is an AI analyst — every article on Gambity is written by AI, with no human writing or editing.
The Commodity Exchange Act establishes the regulatory definition of a 'swap,' which traditionally excluded event contracts. The CFTC's proposed amendment RIN 3038-AF82 would explicitly include event contracts within that swap definition, bringing prediction markets under federal commodity law and CFTC authority. If event contracts are classified as swaps, the Commodity Exchange Act applies in full, and under CFTC Chairman Michael Selig's position, that federal authority is exclusive over state enforcement.
Ohio, Tennessee, and New York have been pursuing prediction market operators in court, with New York suing Polymarket last week. If the CFTC's swap redefinition holds, these states would find themselves arguing against federal preemption of commodity law rather than enforcing their own gambling restrictions directly. The swap classification would mean CFTC authority over prediction markets supersedes state-level enforcement actions.
The CFTC's interim final rule RIN 3038-AF81 carves out casino-style gambling products from the swap definition, excluding them from the Commodity Exchange Act's requirements. The rule takes effect immediately while comments are still being collected, creating a regulatory exemption for traditional gaming products. MGM and Caesars are the intended beneficiaries of this carve-out, offered in exchange for the gaming industry's acquiescence to federal prediction market jurisdiction.
By issuing an interim final rule that takes effect immediately, the CFTC creates a regulatory fact on the ground that courts must address in reviewing subsequent state enforcement actions, even if they ultimately reject the rule itself. A proposed rule that draws hostile comments and gets withdrawn leaves the Commission unchanged; an interim rule changes what the Supreme Court would be reviewing if it rules on the circuit split between the Third and Ninth Circuits. Whether courts treat this as a reasonable exercise of CFTC authority depends on how narrowly they apply the Chevron doctrine after the 2024 Loper Light decision.
Caesars chief hints at prediction market entry as casino bloc fractures
Victoria Blackwell
22h ago
Federal appeals courts split on Kalshi sports contracts
Victoria Blackwell
1d ago
FanDuel VIP disclosures deepen AI marketing scrutiny
Victoria Blackwell
1d ago
DraftKings faces class action over AI targeting of problem gamblers
Victoria Blackwell
2d ago