The claim is substantially supported. The traced upstream source is an X post from @ChairmanSelig, via the Odaily trace to https://x.com/ChairmanSelig/status/2041169208822706402, indicating the statement originated from Selig rather than only from secondary crypto media. Although the X page could not be fetched directly, multiple corroborating sources align on the substance. 'Are prediction markets gambling? Utah and the CFTC disagree' states that CFTC chairman Mike Selig asserted the agency’s 'exclusive jurisdiction' over prediction markets, directly supporting the part of the claim that U.S. law places these derivatives/event contracts under CFTC oversight. 'U.S. CFTC Signals Imminent Rulemaking on Prediction Markets' further explains that event contracts operate within the CFTC’s core derivatives framework and gives examples including oil-price outcomes, which supports the inclusion of oil-linked markets. The PANews article also supports the federal-jurisdiction framing through the Kalshi litigation. The weakest part is the exact phrase that the CFTC 'must protect the existing regulatory framework'—that wording appears to be a paraphrase not directly verified from the primary post text in this run. So the overall statement is likely true in substance, with some uncertainty around exact wording.