Is Kalshi legal?

Is Kalshi Legal in Nevada? What's Blocked and Why

By Owen Monagan ·

Since March 20, 2026, a Carson City court has barred Kalshi from offering sports, election and entertainment contracts to anyone in Nevada, first with a restraining order and then with a preliminary injunction granted on April 3. Kalshi's other markets aren't named in the orders, so it isn't banned outright. Whether its geofence keeps Nevada users out is still in dispute, with a $120,000-a-day penalty at stake.

Can I still use Kalshi in Nevada?

Nevada · as of Sep 22, 2026

Kalshi is switched off in Nevada for 3 of 12 market categories, since Mar 20, 2026.

Sports, election and entertainment contracts are switched off.

What the Nevada order says about your money on Kalshi

How money on Kalshi is protected, wherever you are
  • Kalshi's clearinghouse, Kalshi Klear, has been registered with the CFTC as a derivatives clearing organization since August 2024. Primary source
  • Kalshi Klear's rules require money you deposit directly to be kept separate from its own money, and never mixed with it. Primary source: R7.7F, R7.9C
  • SIPC doesn't cover prediction-market accounts. It excludes commodity futures. Primary source
  • Kalshi Klear uses a bank sweep meant to add FDIC coverage, but Kalshi's own agreement says that coverage is not guaranteed to you. Primary source: §IV
  • Kalshi Klear's rules say withdrawals are processed by the next bank business day, and they make no exception for state restrictions. Primary source: R6.4C

What Nevada is asking the court to order against Kalshi

  • Get licensed, or stopStop offering these contracts in Nevada without a Nevada gaming licence. Primary source

A state court finding that Kalshi likely breaks state gambling law isn't a ruling on how your trades are taxed. Federal tax treatment is a question under the Internal Revenue Code, and no court or IRS guidance has settled it for event contracts. How to file a Kalshi year.

Which Kalshi markets still work in Nevada?

Off: an order blocks it. Not blocked: no order names it. ?: the order's text doesn't settle it.

Sports: The TRO's text is the order we hold. The written and amended preliminary injunctions (Apr 29, May 18) weren't retrieved; the NGCB's contempt application quotes the amended order barring the same three categories, and its Jul 24 release says the same.

Politics: The orders name election-related contracts. Kalshi lists Politics as its own category, and the order text doesn't say whether those contracts count as election-related.

Is Kalshi banned in Nevada? Every ruling, in order

Not outright: 3 of 12 Kalshi market categories are switched off in Nevada under a court order since Mar 20, 2026.

  1. 20 steps, Mar 4, 2025 to Mar 19, 2026
    1. · Nevada Gaming Control Board

      The NGCB sent Kalshi a cease-and-desist letter saying sports and election event contracts are unlawful in Nevada unless licensed, and gave it until 5:00 p.m. on March 14, 2025 to stop.

      Primary source

    2. · Nevada Gaming Control Board

      The NGCB said Kalshi's outside counsel had asked for more time to respond to the cease-and-desist and that the Board did not object to a limited extension.

      Primary source

    3. · U.S. District Court, D. Nev.

      Kalshi sued Nevada regulators in federal court (KalshiEX v. Hendrick, D. Nev. No. 2:25-cv-00575) to stop enforcement of Nevada gaming law.

      Primary source

      Sports Betting Dime (2 Jul 2026) gives the filing date as March 30, 2025. The NGCB timeline says March 28.

    4. · U.S. District Court, D. Nev. (Gordon, C.J.)

      Chief Judge Andrew Gordon granted Kalshi a preliminary injunction barring Nevada from enforcing its gaming laws against Kalshi's contracts.

      Primary source

      Kalshi kept operating as before, so nothing changed for users. The NGCB timeline gives the same date.

    5. · U.S. District Court, D. Nev. (Gordon, C.J.)

      Judge Gordon dissolved Kalshi's preliminary injunction, holding that Kalshi's sports contracts are likely not swaps and that Nevada may enforce its gaming laws.

      Primary source

      The NGCB timeline dates this to Nov. 25, 2025, which is the day Kalshi appealed. It did not change anything for users because Nevada agreed not to enforce while Kalshi's stay motion was pending.

    6. · U.S. District Court, D. Nev. / Ninth Circuit

      Kalshi appealed the dissolution to the Ninth Circuit (No. 25-7516) and asked the district court to stay it pending appeal. The same day Robinhood agreed with Nevada to limit its event-contract offerings in the state pending its own appeal.

      Primary source

      The Robinhood item is from the NGCB timeline (https://www.gaming.nv.gov/about-us/press-releases-public-statements/timeline-of-nevada-gaming-control-board-ngcb-actions-against-prediction-markets/). Nevada customers using Robinhood lost event contracts then, but that is Robinhood's product, not Kalshi's, so changesUsers is false for Kalshi.

    7. · U.S. District Court, D. Nev. (Gordon, C.J.)

      Judge Gordon denied Kalshi's motion to stay the dissolution pending appeal.

      Primary source

    8. · Ninth Circuit

      Kalshi asked the Ninth Circuit to stay the dissolution pending appeal. Nevada agreed in writing not to begin enforcement while the Ninth Circuit considered that motion.

      Primary source

      The motion was fully briefed by Jan. 5, 2026, and was referred to the merits panel on Jan. 27, 2026 (same letter).

    9. · Ninth Circuit (filing by Nevada AG)

      Nevada told the Ninth Circuit it would begin a civil enforcement action against Kalshi on February 17, 2026.

      Primary source

      The letter is dated Feb. 6, 2026. The docket stamp is Feb. 10, 2026.

    10. · Ninth Circuit

      Kalshi filed an emergency motion for an administrative stay in the Ninth Circuit, asking for relief by February 16, 2026.

      Primary source

      Nevada filed its opposition on Feb. 12, 2026 (Dkt. 64.1): https://www.gaming.nv.gov/siteassets/content/about/press-release/dkt-63---opposition-to-kalshis-motion-for-administrative-stay.pdf

    11. · Ninth Circuit

      The Ninth Circuit denied Kalshi's motion for an administrative stay.

      Secondary source

      The order itself was not retrieved.

    12. · Nevada Gaming Control Board / First Judicial District Court, Carson City

      The NGCB filed a civil enforcement action against Kalshi in the First Judicial District Court, Carson City (No. 26 OC 00050 1B), seeking a declaration and an injunction.

      Primary source

      Complaint: https://www.gaming.nv.gov/siteassets/content/about/press-release/kalshi-complaint.pdf

    13. · U.S. District Court, D. Nev.

      Kalshi removed the state enforcement case to federal court (D. Nev. No. 2:26-cv-00406).

      Secondary source

      The fact of removal is primary (the Mar. 2 remand order). The exact day is secondary: reports say Kalshi removed 'immediately'. The NGCB filed an emergency motion to remand on Feb. 18, 2026: https://www.gaming.nv.gov/siteassets/content/about/press-release/ecf-no.-10---emergency-motion-to-remand.pdf

    14. · U.S. District Court, D. Nev. (Du, J.)

      The federal court held a hearing on the NGCB's motion to remand.

      Primary source

    15. · U.S. District Court, D. Nev. (Du, J.)

      Judge Miranda Du ruled the federal court lacked jurisdiction and ordered the case sent back to state court in Carson City.

      Primary source

    16. · U.S. District Court, D. Nev.

      Kalshi asked the federal court for an administrative stay of the remand order and said it would appeal it.

      Primary source

    17. · U.S. District Court, D. Nev.

      The NGCB asked the federal court either to remand promptly or to issue its own TRO against Kalshi, since the state court could not act while the stay motion was pending.

      Primary source

    18. · U.S. District Court, D. Nev. (Du, J.)

      Judge Du denied Kalshi's motion to stay the remand pending appeal and sent the case back to state court.

      Secondary source

      The order itself was not retrieved.

    19. · First Judicial District Court, Carson City

      The NGCB filed a renewed ex parte application for a TRO and a motion for preliminary injunction in the Carson City court.

      Primary source

      Kalshi filed a preliminary opposition on Mar. 13, 2026 (same order).

    20. · Ninth Circuit

      The Ninth Circuit denied Kalshi's request to stay the remand order.

      Secondary source

      The order itself was not retrieved.

  2. Turning point · · First Judicial District Court, Carson City (Woodbury, J.)

    Judge Jason Woodbury issued a TRO barring Kalshi from offering sports, election and entertainment event contracts in Nevada and from taking those wagers from anyone under 21. Kalshi responded by blocking users who listed Nevada as their state of residence.

    Primary source: TRO order, 26 OC 00050 1B (recites the Mar. 12 filing)

    NGCB release: https://www.gaming.nv.gov/siteassets/content/about/press-release/ngcb-granted-tro-against-kalshi.pdf. The residency-based block is described in the NGCB's June 4 contempt application, which cites its Mar. 27, 2026 supplemental brief. That block did not cover non-residents physically in Nevada, and residents could get around it by reporting another state.

  3. 4 steps, Apr 3, 2026 to May 4, 2026
    1. · First Judicial District Court, Carson City (Woodbury, J.)

      At a hearing, Judge Woodbury ruled from the bench that he would grant the NGCB a preliminary injunction, ordered Kalshi to geofence Nevada within 30 days, and extended the TRO 14 days until a written order issued.

      Primary source

      The 30-day geofence requirement comes from the NGCB contempt application of June 4, 2026, citing the hearing recording at 1:58-2:01. The TRO restrictions were already in force, so users saw no new change.

    2. · Ninth Circuit

      The Ninth Circuit heard oral argument in the Kalshi, Crypto.com and Robinhood appeals.

      Primary source

    3. · First Judicial District Court, Carson City (Woodbury, J.)

      Judge Woodbury issued the written preliminary injunction, giving Kalshi until May 4, 2026 to make the technical changes needed to comply, with any extension to be requested by sworn declaration.

      Primary source: Mem. p.3, ll.9–12 (PDF p.5)

      The Apr. 29 order itself was not retrieved. Its date and terms come from the NGCB's own filing.

    4. · First Judicial District Court, Carson City

      Kalshi's deadline to make the technical changes required by the preliminary injunction.

      Primary source

      No evidence that anything changed for users on this date. Kalshi's counsel later said geolocation and geofencing were implemented as of May 27, 2026.

  4. Turning point · · First Judicial District Court, Carson City (Woodbury, J.)

    On the NGCB's motion for clarification, the court issued an amended preliminary injunction confirming it covers people within the State of Nevada, not just Nevada residents, and barring Kalshi from offering or facilitating sports, election and entertainment contracts there.

    “On May 18, 2026, the Court confirmed that the preliminary injunction “was intended to address KALSHI’s transactions with individuals within the State of Nevada and not just Nevada residents.””“On May 18, 2026, the First Judicial District Court in the State of Nevada entered a preliminary injunction prohibiting Kalshi from offering or facilitating contracts on sports-, election-, or entertainment-related events within the State of Nevada.”

    Primary source: NGCB contempt application (filed 4 Jun 2026), citing the order of Apr. 29, 2026 · Mem. p.3, ll.15–20 (PDF p.5)Primary source: NGCB release, 24 Jul 2026; NGCB contempt application

    The amended order did not extend the compliance date (contempt application). Kalshi's counsel said Kalshi received the order on May 21 and had geofencing in place as of May 27. Whether it actually stopped non-residents in Nevada is disputed (see May 28-June 1). Two orders, not a date conflict: the written PI is Apr 29 and the amended PI May 18 (contempt application, Mem. p.3); the Jul 24 release's "entered a preliminary injunction" on May 18 is the amended one.

  5. 7 steps, May 28, 2026 to Jul 24, 2026
    1. · Nevada Gaming Control Board

      From May 28 to June 1, 2026, NGCB investigators physically in Nevada, on iOS phones on Nevada cellular networks and without VPNs, made eight successful purchases of sports or election contracts on Kalshi. One was on the Los Angeles mayoral election.

      Primary source

      Purchases were made on May 28, 30 and 31 and June 1. The NGCB notified Kalshi on May 28 and June 1, and the two sides' counsel spoke by phone on June 2.

    2. · First Judicial District Court, Carson City

      The NGCB filed an application asking the court to order Kalshi to show cause why it should not be held in contempt of the amended preliminary injunction, and to impose monetary sanctions.

      Primary source

      Date conflict: the NGCB's press release is dated June 12, 2026 and says the Board 'today asked' the court to hold Kalshi in contempt, and press coverage uses June 12. The filed application (stamped June 4) and the July 23 joint stipulation both say June 4, and so does the NGCB's own timeline. June 12 may be the date of the NGCB's reply brief (https://www.gaming.nv.gov/siteassets/content/about/press-release/plaintiffs-reply-in-support-of-application-for-ex-parte-order-to-show-cause-regarding-contempt.pdf); not confirmed. The application also says Kalshi had moved to stay the amended PI pending appeal.

    3. · Nevada Gaming Control Board

      The NGCB issued a release announcing that it had asked the court to hold Kalshi in contempt for not complying with the May 18 geofencing order.

      Primary source

      See the June 4 note on the date conflict.

    4. · First Judicial District Court, Carson City

      The court set a hearing on the contempt application for July 29, 2026.

      Primary source

      Daniel Wallach (via SBD, 2 Jul 2026) reported a full-day evidentiary hearing on July 16. The stipulation, which is primary, names July 29 as the hearing it vacated.

    5. · Nevada Supreme Court

      The Nevada Supreme Court (Pickering, Parraguirre, Bell) denied Kalshi's emergency motion to stay the preliminary injunction pending its appeal (No. 92771).

      Secondary source

      SBD says 'on Wednesday' (July 1). DeviceDaily gives July 1, 2026. Case number 92771 is from nextpredict.io. The date Kalshi filed its Nevada Supreme Court appeal was not found.

    6. · First Judicial District Court, Carson City

      Kalshi and the NGCB filed a joint stipulation. Kalshi acknowledged investigators had traded sports, election and entertainment contracts despite its IP- and residency-based blocks, and agreed to implement GeoComply multi-source geofencing by August 12, 2026. If it missed that date it would pay $120,000 a day or file a sworn affidavit explaining the delay.

      Primary source

      Kalshi did not concede contempt. It also agreed to give Nevada the same GeoComply updates it gives Michigan.

    7. · First Judicial District Court, Carson City (Woodbury, J.)

      Judge Woodbury signed the stipulation as an order, vacating the July 29 contempt hearing, and the NGCB announced it.

      Primary source

      Signed order: https://www.gaming.nv.gov/siteassets/content/about/press-release/2026.07.24-joint-stipulation.order-signed.pdf

  6. Turning point · · First Judicial District Court, Carson City

    Deadline for Kalshi to finish GeoComply geofencing of Nevada under the stipulated order.

    Primary source: Joint stipulation and order, 23-24 Jul 2026

    This is when location-based blocking was supposed to reach everyone in Nevada. Whether it did is disputed (see Aug. 14).

  7. 5 steps, Aug 14, 2026 to Sep 11, 2026
    1. · Nevada Gaming Control Board / First Judicial District Court, Carson City

      The NGCB filed a notice in the Carson City court saying Kalshi missed the August 12 deadline, that investigators bought banned contracts from Nevada on mobile phones afterward, and that the $120,000-a-day penalty should apply. The same day, Kalshi's attorneys sent the Board a letter saying investigators misrepresented their residence and, in at least one case, worked around the block.

      Secondary source

      The article says 'late Friday', which is Aug. 14, 2026. The filing was not retrieved. Other outlets report 'nine separate trades' a day after the deadline, and Kalshi saying investigators used a 'previous version' of its app. On Aug. 15 Kalshi GC Rick Heaslip called the effort 'a vindictive waste of taxpayer dollars', and the NGCB posted a statement calling Kalshi's accusations 'baseless' (same article; the NGCB statement was not found on its site). No ruling on the $120k/day request was found.

    2. · Ninth Circuit

      A 3-0 Ninth Circuit panel (R. Nelson, Bade, Lee) affirmed the dissolution of Kalshi's preliminary injunction, holding that the Commodity Exchange Act likely does not preempt Nevada's gaming laws as applied to sports event contracts. It sent the election-contract question back to the district court. Crypto.com's and Robinhood's appeals were decided the same day.

      Primary source

      Disposition: 'AFFIRMED IN PART AND REMANDED IN PART.' NGCB release: https://www.gaming.nv.gov/siteassets/content/about/press-release/ninth-circuit-rules-in-favor-of-nevada.pdf. The Crypto.com (25-7187) and Robinhood (25-7831) decision dates come from the Supreme Court dockets. Nothing changed for users: the state-court injunction was already blocking them.

    3. · Ninth Circuit

      Kalshi petitioned for rehearing en banc of the August 28 panel decision instead of seeking Supreme Court review.

      Secondary source

      The petition and docket were not retrieved. The Sept. 9 date is from Prediction News, SBD and InGame, which agree. The status of the mandate is not confirmed from the docket.

    4. · U.S. Supreme Court

      Robinhood Derivatives filed a cert petition asking the Supreme Court to review the Ninth Circuit's Nevada ruling (Robinhood Derivatives v. Dreitzer, No. 26-338). Nevada's response is due October 14, 2026.

      Primary source

      Date conflict: news reports (Covers, DeFi Rate, casemine summary) say Robinhood filed on Sept. 9. The docket says 'Sep 10 2026 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed', docketed Sept. 14, 2026.

    5. · U.S. Supreme Court

      Crypto.com (North American Derivatives Exchange) filed a cert petition asking the Supreme Court to review the Ninth Circuit's Nevada ruling (No. 26-344). The response is due October 15, 2026.

      Primary source

      Date conflict: Vital Law and Insider Sport report the filing as Sept. 15, 2026, which is the docketed date. The docket shows the petition filed Sept. 11.

Why did a Nevada court block Kalshi?

Nevada's Gaming Control Board treats sports event contracts as wagering that needs a Nevada gaming license (Board release, April 3, 2026). It sent Kalshi a cease-and-desist letter on March 4, 2025. Kalshi sued in federal court and at first won: Chief Judge Andrew Gordon blocked Nevada from enforcing its gaming law on April 9, 2025. He dissolved that injunction on November 24, 2025, holding that Kalshi's sports contracts are likely not swaps, so Nevada may enforce (Kalshi's Ninth Circuit motion).

The Board then sued Kalshi in Carson City on February 17, 2026 (release). A federal judge sent the case back to state court on March 2 (remand order), and Judge Jason Woodbury issued a restraining order on March 20. He granted a preliminary injunction from the bench on April 3, put it in writing on April 29, and amended it on May 18 to reach "individuals within the State of Nevada and not just Nevada residents", as the Board's contempt application quotes it (Mem. p.3). We haven't located the April 29 or May 18 orders themselves.

On August 28 a unanimous Ninth Circuit panel affirmed Judge Gordon, holding that federal commodities law likely doesn't preempt Nevada's gaming law for sports contracts. It wrote that "for Kalshi to deny that its sports event contracts are sports bets under a reasonable person's understanding is disingenuous" (p.28), and sent the election contracts back for the district court to consider (p.42). The Third Circuit went the other way for New Jersey, which is why the question is now in front of the Supreme Court: Kalshi at the Supreme Court follows it, and is Kalshi gambling? sets out both sides. None of these rulings is a ruling on how your trades are taxed.

Does Kalshi's Nevada geofence work?

That is the live fight. Under the restraining order, Kalshi blocked users who listed Nevada as their state of residence, which didn't cover a non-resident standing in Nevada. The May 18 order was meant to close that gap. Even so, from May 28 to June 1, Board investigators physically in Nevada, on iPhones on Nevada cellular networks, made eight purchases of sports or election contracts, one of them on the Los Angeles mayoral election. The Board asked the court to hold Kalshi in contempt (contempt application, filed June 4).

Kalshi didn't concede contempt, but in a joint stipulation filed July 23 it acknowledged the investigators' trades and agreed to finish a GeoComply geofence by August 12. If it missed that date, it would either pay $120,000 a day until the work was done or file a sworn affidavit explaining the delay, after which the court could set a penalty. The Board's July 24 release describes it as "a penalty of $120,000 per day until implementation is complete." Judge Woodbury signed the stipulation as an order and cancelled the contempt hearing.

On August 14 the Board told the court that Kalshi had missed the deadline and that investigators had again bought blocked contracts from Nevada, and asked for the penalty. Kalshi's lawyers answered that the investigators misrepresented their residence and, in at least one case, worked around the block. Both accounts come from The Nevada Independent; we haven't found the filing itself, or a ruling on the penalty.

Why does Kalshi say my location is restricted in Nevada?

The Nevada orders turn on where you are. The stipulated geofence is meant to "identify and prevent anyone within the geographic boundaries of the State of Nevada" from entering the barred contracts (July 24 release), so a visitor inside Nevada is covered, and a Nevada address on your account was the older, narrower test. The orders name sports, election and entertainment contracts. They don't name Kalshi's other categories, and the order text doesn't say whether Kalshi's separate Politics category counts as election-related.

The Nevada orders don't decide how Kalshi trades are taxed. Trades you already made still belong on your federal return: how to file Kalshi taxes.

Every other state's status, from the same data: is Kalshi legal in my state?

Kalshi, state by state · as of Sep 22, 2026

Tap a state to see what’s switched off there, what happens to your money, and the order behind it.

  • Switched off · 3
  • Ordered, on hold · 1
  • Being fought · 15
  • No action found · 32
  • Some categories off

NevadaSwitched off3 of 12 categories offsince Mar 20, 2026

Sports, election and entertainment contracts are switched off.

  • Withdraw your cash: not verified. We haven't found the written order's text, so we can't say what it says about withdrawals. Primary source
  • Close open positions: not verified. Not verified against the order text yet. Primary source
  • New trades: blocked. No new sports, election or entertainment trades for anyone in Nevada (a third-party geofence was due by Aug 12). Primary source

Off: Sports, Elections, Entertainment

Carson City District Court granted Nevada a preliminary injunction on April 3. On August 28 the Ninth Circuit ruled 3-0 against Kalshi on the federal question. Nevada regulators have alleged that the geofence leaked and are asking for $120,000 a day.

What’s next: Kalshi has asked the full Ninth Circuit to rehear the case. The state-court injunction stays in force either way.

Primary source: Nevada Gaming Control Board, Apr 3, 2026Primary source: Nevada Gaming Control Board, Aug 28, 2026

Every Kalshi ruling in Nevada, in order →

Kalshi status by state, as of Sep 22, 2026
StateStatusWhat it meansSince
MichiganSwitched off (1 of 12 categories off)Sports contracts are switched off. The order names no other category.Jun 29, 2026
NevadaSwitched off (3 of 12 categories off)Sports, election and entertainment contracts are switched off.Mar 20, 2026
WashingtonSwitched off (7 of 12 categories off)Seven of Kalshi's twelve categories are switched off, sports and elections among them. The order lets finance, economics, climate and commodities keep trading, and doesn't say whether crypto is covered.Sep 2, 2026
MassachusettsOrdered, on holdA court ordered sports contracts off, then paused it. You can still trade here.
ArizonaBeing foughtArizona's criminal case against Kalshi is blocked for now. Nothing is switched off.
ConnecticutBeing foughtConnecticut has sued. Nothing is switched off yet.
IllinoisBeing foughtIn court. Nothing is switched off yet.
IowaBeing foughtKalshi lost a bid to stop Iowa. Nothing is switched off yet.
KentuckyBeing foughtKentucky has sued. Nothing is switched off yet.
MarylandBeing foughtIn court. Nothing is switched off yet.
MinnesotaBeing foughtA state ban was passed, then paused by a federal court.
MissouriBeing foughtA cease-and-desist was sent in September. Nothing is switched off yet.
MontanaBeing foughtA cease-and-desist is on hold. Nothing is switched off.
New JerseyBeing foughtKalshi won here. New Jersey has asked the Supreme Court to step in.
New YorkBeing foughtNew York has sued. Nothing is switched off yet.
OhioBeing foughtKalshi lost its bid to stop Ohio. Nothing is switched off yet.
TennesseeBeing foughtKalshi won the first round. Nothing is switched off.
UtahBeing foughtA federal court ruled for Utah. Nothing is switched off yet.
WisconsinBeing foughtWisconsin has sued. Nothing is switched off yet.
Every other stateNo action foundAlabama, Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wyoming

Kalshi event contracts, state by state. What a court or regulator has actually done, as it stands on the date above. Not legal advice.

Sources for Kalshi in Nevada

  1. Primary source TRO order, 26 OC 00050 1B (recites the Mar. 12 filing). Our copy. Cited 14×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  2. Primary source NGCB release, 4 Mar 2025. Our copy. Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  3. Primary source NGCB statement, 14 Mar 2025. Our copy. Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  4. Primary source NGCB prediction-market timeline. Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  5. Primary source Kalshi's Ninth Circuit emergency motion, Dkt. 62.1 (describes the Nov. 24, 2025 dissolution order). Our copy. Cited 4×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  6. Primary source Nevada AG letter to Ninth Circuit, Dkt. 61.1. Our copy. Cited 2×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  7. Primary source NGCB release, 17 Feb 2026. Our copy. Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  8. Primary source Remand order, ECF No. 45. Our copy. Cited 2×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  9. Primary source Kalshi emergency motion, Doc. 46 (filed 03/03/26). Our copy. Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  10. Primary source NGCB ex parte motion for TRO, ECF No. 56 (filed 03/09/26). Our copy. Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  11. Primary source NGCB contempt application (filed 4 Jun 2026), citing the order of Apr. 29, 2026. Our copy. Cited 5×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  12. Primary source NGCB release, 24 Jul 2026; NGCB contempt application. Our copy. Cited 2×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  13. Primary source NGCB release, 12 Jun 2026. Our copy. Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  14. Primary source Joint stipulation and order, 23-24 Jul 2026. Our copy. Cited 3×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  15. Primary source Supreme Court docket, No. 26-338, Supreme Court of the United States, No. 26-338. Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  16. Primary source Supreme Court docket, No. 26-344, Supreme Court of the United States, No. 26-344. Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  17. Primary source NGCB press release: preliminary injunction granted against Kalshi (2026-04-03), Nevada Gaming Control Board, Apr 3, 2026. Our copy. Cited 6×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  18. Primary source KalshiEX v. Assad, Ninth Circuit opinion, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 25-7516, Aug 28, 2026. Our copy. Cited 3×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  19. Primary source Ninth Circuit rules in favor of Nevada, Nevada Gaming Control Board, Aug 28, 2026. Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  20. Secondary source Yahoo Finance, 17 Feb 2026 (secondary, citing Daniel Wallach). Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  21. Secondary source SBC Americas, 18 Feb 2026 (secondary). Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  22. Secondary source DeviceDaily (secondary, quoting Daniel Wallach's 12 Mar 2026 post). Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  23. Secondary source InGame, 19 Mar 2026 (secondary). Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  24. Secondary source Sports Betting Dime, 2 Jul 2026 (secondary; order quoted). Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  25. Secondary source The Nevada Independent, 15 Aug 2026 (secondary). Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.
  26. Secondary source DeFi Rate (secondary). Cited 1×, checked Sep 23, 2026.

Questions people ask

Can I use Kalshi in Nevada?

Partly. As of September 22, 2026, a Carson City court's preliminary injunction bars Kalshi from offering sports, election and entertainment contracts to anyone within Nevada. The orders don't name Kalshi's other categories, and the order text doesn't say whether Kalshi's separate Politics category counts as election-related.

Why is Kalshi illegal in Nevada?

Kalshi isn't banned outright in Nevada. The Nevada Gaming Control Board treats sports event contracts as wagering that needs a Nevada gaming license, and a Carson City court agreed to block Kalshi's sports, election and entertainment contracts, first with a restraining order on March 20, 2026 and then with a preliminary injunction. On August 28, 2026 the Ninth Circuit held that federal commodities law likely doesn't preempt Nevada's gaming law for those sports contracts.

What was the court ruling in the Nevada Kalshi case?

There are two. In state court, Judge Jason Woodbury granted the Gaming Control Board a preliminary injunction from the bench on April 3, 2026, issued it in writing on April 29 and amended it on May 18 to cover anyone within Nevada, not only residents. In federal court, a 3-0 Ninth Circuit panel on August 28, 2026 affirmed the end of Kalshi's own injunction against Nevada.

Does Kalshi's Nevada geofence work?

It is disputed. Gaming Control Board investigators bought blocked contracts from inside Nevada in late May and early June 2026. In a July 23 agreement Kalshi acknowledged those trades and agreed to finish a GeoComply geofence by August 12, or else pay $120,000 a day or explain the delay to the court under oath. In mid-August the Board told the court the deadline was missed; Kalshi said investigators misrepresented their residence. No ruling on the penalty has been found.

Will Kalshi come back in Nevada?

Only if a court lifts the Carson City injunction. Kalshi has asked the full Ninth Circuit to rehear its August 28, 2026 loss, and Robinhood and Crypto.com have asked the Supreme Court to review the same ruling. The Carson City injunction is a state-court order and stays in force whatever the federal courts do, until that court or a higher state court changes it.

Does the Nevada ruling change how Kalshi trades are taxed?

No. A state court finding that Kalshi likely breaks state gambling law isn't a ruling on how your trades are taxed. Federal tax treatment is a question under the Internal Revenue Code, and no court or IRS guidance has settled it for event contracts.

Keep reading

Browse all guides or start from the Prediction Market Tax Center.