The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled against prediction-market operator Kalshi in consolidated disputes with Ohio and Tennessee, finding that Kalshi had not provided sufficient grounds to classify its sports-event contracts as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. The court also rejected Kalshi's argument that federal law would preempt state gambling regulations even if the contracts qualified as swaps, allowing Ohio and Tennessee to enforce their gambling laws and overturning a previous Tennessee injunction favoring the company. The decision conflicts with the Third Circuit's April ruling involving New Jersey, while aligning with a Ninth Circuit decision that subjected Kalshi's contracts to Nevada gambling laws, raising the prospect of U.S. Supreme Court review. Separately, New York sued Polymarket, alleging that it operates an unlicensed gambling business.