Polymarket Sues Massachusetts as Dispute Over Prediction Markets Intensifies

Polymarket has taken Massachusetts to federal court, challenging the state’s attempt to regulate prediction markets tied to real-world events. The lawsuit highlights a widening legal fight over whether such contracts fall under federal commodities law or state gambling rules.

The prediction market argues that oversight of event-based contracts rests solely with the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission. It claims that individual states lack the authority to impose gaming restrictions on nationally accessible prediction markets.

Legal Clash on Prediction Markets

Polymarket’s chief legal officer, Neal Kumar, confirmed the lawsuit in a post on X today. He said the case raises federal questions that should not be decided through state-level enforcement actions.

Today, we filed a lawsuit in federal court against Massachusetts. Congress gave the CFTC, not states, exclusive authority over event contracts.

These are national markets with critical questions that must be resolved in federal court 🧵

— Neal Kumar (@HereComesKumar) February 9, 2026

Kumar also said state efforts to shut down prediction platforms do not alter the legal framework set by Congress. According to him, prediction markets operate across state lines and require consistent regulatory treatment.

These arguments come as Massachusetts has stepped up enforcement against similar platforms offering sports-related contracts. State officials have argued that these products resemble sports wagering and must comply with local gaming laws.

In January, a Massachusetts judge ruled that Kalshi could not offer sports event contracts to residents without a gaming license. The court later rejected Kalshi’s request to delay enforcement while it pursues an appeal.

Sports Contracts Under Scrutiny

Massachusetts is part of a broader push by states to rein in prediction markets linked to sports outcomes. Nevada regulators and other jurisdictions have taken enforcement steps against Polymarket, Kalshi, and related partners.

Some actions have extended beyond platforms to include intermediaries. In separate cases, state authorities have pursued legal action involving companies such as Coinbase over comparable products.

Regulators argue that allowing unlicensed platforms undermines consumer safeguards. They say the practical effect of sports-linked contracts aligns closely with traditional betting markets.

Courts have not reached uniform conclusions on the issue. For example, a federal judge recently blocked Tennessee from enforcing a cease-and-desist order against Kalshi while reviewing federal preemption claims.

The post Polymarket Sues Massachusetts as Dispute Over Prediction Markets Intensifies appeared first on CoinTab News.