Ohio officials have warned prediction-market operators that they may face legal action if they keep offering sports-event contracts despite state cease-and-desist orders.
Governor Mike DeWine said Attorney General Andy Wilson was preparing lawsuits against operators that failed to stop offering the products. Ohio regulators argue that the contracts amount to unlicensed sports betting under state law, while operators maintain that they are federally regulated financial products.
Ohio Attorney General Prepares Enforcement Against Operators That Ignore Orders
Ohio’s Casino Control Commission (OCCC) issued notices to 10 companies in early October and ordered them to stop offering sports-event contracts in the state by 16 October. The named operators include Underdog, Gemini Titan, Coinbase, ProphetX, Novig, Robinhood, Polymarket, Plus500, Moomoo and Webull.
“The law is very clear. The court decisions have been very clear. The attorney general of Ohio is taking actions he needs to take,” DeWine said.
The OCCC said failure to comply could result in administrative, civil or criminal enforcement. It added that it was discussing compliance with several companies, while one operator had confirmed that it would comply and two were pursuing litigation.
State Regulators Say Event Contracts Are Sports Betting Under Ohio Law
The OCCC’s position is that sports-event contracts are sports betting, hence require a licence under Ohio law, regardless of how the products are structured or classified at federal level.
It cited a September decision by the Sixth Circuit as strengthening Ohio’s position in the Kalshi dispute. The commission maintains that the ruling supports its view that sports contracts fall within state gambling regulation.
Kalshi was not included in the latest group of 10 notices because it remains involved in separate litigation with Ohio authorities.
Operators Rely On Federal Regulation And Challenge State Enforcement
Robinhood has argued that its event contracts are federally regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and are offered through its CFTC-registered derivatives business.
This reflects the central dispute between operators and state regulators. Companies argue that federal commodities law governs their products, while Ohio says contracts tied to sporting events are gambling products requiring state approval.
Polymarket has sued the OCCC and Attorney General Andy Wilson, seeking to block enforcement. Its complaint argues that Ohio’s requirements conflict with the Commerce Clause and are pre-empted by the federal Commodity Exchange Act.
The company is seeking preliminary and permanent injunctions, as well as legal fees and costs. It also argues that Ohio’s sports-gaming licence requirements place an excessive burden on operators without a physical presence in the state.
Sixth Circuit Ruling Gives Ohio Additional Support In The Dispute
The Sixth Circuit ruled against Kalshi after finding that the company had not shown its sports contracts were swaps covered by federal commodities law. Also, the court found that the Commodity Exchange Act did not expressly or implicitly pre-empt Ohio and Tennessee gambling laws in the cases before it.
Ohio is relying on this decision to support its position that states can regulate sports-event contracts under their own gambling frameworks. Furthermore, the state legislature is considering additional measures.
Senate Bill 479 would prohibit election betting and election-related contracts, while Senate Bill 430 would classify sports-event contracts as sports gambling subject to regulation and taxation. Furthermore, New Jersey, Nevada and Tennessee are increasing scrutiny of prediction-market products.
Ohio’s warning shows that the dispute over prediction markets has moved from regulatory disagreement towards direct litigation and potential criminal enforcement. Operators may keep relying on federal registration, but the Sixth Circuit decision gives states a stronger argument where contracts are tied to sports outcomes.
Share
5 views
