KalshiEX LLC v. Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection

Preliminary injunction reportedly denied — unconfirmed2d Cir.Kalshi v. State

Last updated August 16, 2026. Snapshot — not legal advice.

Overview

Kalshi’s own Connecticut suit (filed December 2025) against the state’s consumer-protection regulators, distinct from the CFTC’s preemption suit. Trade press reported in August 2026 that the court denied Kalshi a preliminary injunction, holding that sports event contracts do not meet the Commodity Exchange Act’s definition of a "swap" and that Connecticut’s gambling laws are not displaced. We have not confirmed this against the docket or the order, and we do not have the caption or docket number — so it is recorded here as reported, not established. It matters because an earlier report of a ~May 2026 pro-platform permanent injunction in Connecticut also circulated and could never be verified; that report appears to have been wrong, and this case is the likely source of the confusion.

Timeline

December 2025

Kalshi sues Connecticut consumer-protection regulators in federal court.

August 2026

Reporting describes a preliminary injunction denied on the ground that the contracts are not "swaps." Unconfirmed against the docket.

What's next: Obtain the docket and order before treating the reported denial as established.

Parties

Plaintiffs

  • KalshiEX LLC

Defendants

  • Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection
  • Director, Gaming Division
This page is informational, not legal advice. Nearly every entry in this tracker is a preliminary ruling under appeal. Always verify a platform's current, location-specific eligibility directly with the venue before relying on this page.