Minnesota Criminalizes Prediction Markets Like Kalshi and Polymarket
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz signed the nation's first law banning prediction market sites, prompting the Trump administration to sue, setting up a federal legal battle over state versus federal regulatory authority.
Objective Facts
On May 18, 2026, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz signed a public safety bill (SF4760) into law that makes Minnesota the first state to outlaw prediction markets, with the law taking effect August 1. The law makes it a felony to host, create or advertise a prediction market in the state, and extends to anyone providing 'supportive services' or data to the platforms. Federal authorities at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed a lawsuit Tuesday aiming to stop the law from going into effect, arguing that prediction markets fall under federal oversight. Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison countered that prediction markets are 'designed to be addictive and prey especially on young people and low-income folks.'
Left-Leaning Perspective
Minnesota Rep. Emma Greenman, the Democrat who introduced the bill, told ABC News on Wednesday that 'We're seeing studies come out that say [the companies] are targeting 18- to 21-year-olds and we are seeing gambling starting younger and younger.' Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, also a Democrat, argued that 'Prediction markets are designed to be addictive and prey especially on young people and low-income folks' and 'help the ultra-rich get richer and the rest of us get poorer.' Critics on the left argue that prediction markets encourage nonstop wagering by making betting accessible through mobile apps and presenting gambling activity as financial trading, and contend that the platforms can worsen gambling problems in states where sports betting remains illegal. A Wall Street Journal analysis found that 67% of profits on Polymarket go to just 0.1% of accounts, and on Kalshi unprofitable users outnumber profitable ones by nearly three to one. Left-leaning coverage emphasizes that prediction markets have given access to sports betting to people in states where the activity is prohibited by operating as 'event contracts' rather than gambling, and notes that on Kalshi more than 85% of trading activity is related to sporting events.
Right-Leaning Perspective
Minnesota Republicans Drew Roach and Nolan West criticized the ban itself, with Roach calling it 'a great overstep' and 'a sad day for Minnesotans,' and West saying the prediction market language would force him to oppose the entire bill. The Trump administration argues that prediction markets are in the federal domain and should be regulated by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, and Kalshi and other major platforms have agreed with this position. Rep. Nolan West warned lawmakers that banning prediction markets would shift activity 'into the shadows,' arguing that 'thousands of Minnesota residents used prediction markets' and that 'prohibition doesn't work.' Kalshi spokeswoman Elisabeth Diana said banning prediction markets is a 'blatant violation' of law, comparing it to 'trying to ban the New York Stock Exchange,' and argued that the ban 'actively harms users because it reduces competition and drives activity offshore.' Right-leaning coverage notes that former CFTC members and legal experts say bets on football games, words President Trump might say during a press conference, and whether Ricky Martin will make an appearance at the Super Bowl are matters 'far outside' the CFTC's traditional scope, questioning the broader regulatory framework rather than focusing on harm.
Deep Dive
Minnesota is not just banning prediction markets; it is challenging the legal framework that lets event-contract platforms operate outside the traditional state-by-state gambling model and answering a question regulators have circled for years: are prediction markets financial exchanges, gambling platforms, or a new category that sits awkwardly between the two? The core issue emerged because the Trump administration regulates prediction sites as 'event contracts' rather than gambling, which typically is overseen by state gaming authorities, allowing these platforms to operate nationwide even in states with sports betting bans. Both sides have substantive legal arguments: the CFTC claims exclusive jurisdiction under the Commodity Exchange Act, but former CFTC members and legal experts say bets on football games and pop culture outcomes fall 'far outside' the CFTC's traditional scope of regulating commodity futures. The uncomfortable truth is that both sides have a point—event contracts can have legitimate forecasting value and serious arguments exist for treating some as financial products, but once the market moves into sports, elections, and pop culture outcomes, the consumer experience looks much closer to gambling, and that is the problem Minnesota is trying to force into the open. The CFTC has filed a lawsuit arguing that Minnesota's law violates the U.S. Constitution by criminalizing at the state level the operation of derivatives markets governed by federal law, and is seeking a preliminary injunction to stop the law from going into effect on August 1, 2026.