The left is silent
No left-of-center outlet in our set has published this story.
Blindspot
Courts
U.S. appeals court rules against prediction markets, sets up likely fight at Supreme Court
A federal appeals court, the Ninth Circuit, ruled that sports-related prediction contracts count as gambling and can be regulated by states, rejecting the argument that they should be treated as federally regulated swaps. The ruling contrasts with a prior decision from the Third Circuit, creating a split between the circuits that is expected to lead to a Supreme Court case.
Coverage blindspot · the left isn't covering this
Appeals court rules states can regulate prediction market platforms like gambling
The Hill and CNBC report the ruling as a straightforward legal/business story, emphasizing the circuit split with the Third Circuit, the likelihood of a Supreme Court fight, and market reactions (DraftKings, Flutter stock gains), with CNBC providing extensive statements from Nevada, CFTC, Kalshi, and Robinhood.
Prediction Markets Dealt Major Blow In State Gambling Fight
The Daily Wire frames the ruling similarly as a legal blow to prediction markets, emphasizing judicial reasoning quotes (Judge Ryan Nelson, the panel's finding that CFTC 'is not a national gambling regulator') and state regulators' pushback, with less emphasis on industry/market stock reaction framing than CNBC but substantively covering the same facts.