Nevada — home to the most established sports betting market in the United States — became the first state to formally bar Kalshi from offering sports-related event contracts via court order. Judge Jason Woodbury of the First Judicial District Court in Carson City issued a temporary restraining order on March 20, 2026, and at an April 3 hearing announced he would grant the Nevada Gaming Control Board’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
Under the preliminary injunction, Kalshi must implement mandatory geofencing to block all Nevada-based participants by May 4, 2026.
The court’s reasoning
Judge Woodbury cut to the central question that has divided courts across the country: is a sports event contract economically distinguishable from a sports wager?
“No matter how you slice it, that conduct is indistinguishable [from gaming activity].”
— Judge Jason Woodbury, First Judicial District Court, Carson City
The court rejected Kalshi’s argument that its products are “swaps” falling under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) — the same argument that won at the Third Circuit a few days later in Kalshi’s New Jersey appeal.
Why Nevada matters
Three reasons the Nevada ruling carries outsized significance:
- Established gaming regulator. The Nevada Gaming Control Board is the oldest and most sophisticated state sports betting regulator in the country. Its testimony and litigation positions carry weight nationally.
- First court-enforced ban. Massachusetts had ruled against Kalshi in January 2026, but the Nevada decision was the first to include affirmative court-ordered geofencing — a concrete operational requirement Kalshi must comply with or face contempt.
- Setup for federal challenge. Kalshi has indicated it will appeal. The Ninth Circuit (which covers Nevada) heard related oral argument on April 16, 2026 and is expected to rule 60-120 days later. If the Ninth Circuit reverses or splits with the Third Circuit’s pro-Kalshi ruling, the Supreme Court becomes substantially more likely to grant certiorari.
Why it matters for NM
The Nevada ruling is part of the growing body of state-level precedent the four NM tribes are relying on in their May 12, 2026 federal Kalshi suit. The legal theory in both cases is similar:
- Kalshi’s sports event contracts function as sports wagers
- State (or tribal) gambling regulation properly applies
- CFTC’s federal commodities authority does not preempt state and tribal gambling laws
The NM suit adds the additional dimension of tribal sovereignty under IGRA, which Nevada (a commercial-gaming state) does not. If the Ninth Circuit affirms Judge Woodbury’s reasoning, that decision would carry roughly the same precedential weight in NM as the Massachusetts Superior Court ruling on the merits — but with a federal appellate stamp that the Third Circuit decision has on the other side.
The bigger pattern
Counting all 2026 actions, Kalshi was facing legal pressure from:
- State court / regulator actions: Nevada (banned), Ohio ($5M fine pending), Massachusetts (banned)
- Federal lawsuits from states or tribes: Washington (March 27), New Mexico tribes (May 12), and others
- Criminal charges: Arizona (March)
- CFTC support: Multiple amicus briefs backing Kalshi’s preemption defense
Industry observers expect the Supreme Court to ultimately resolve the conflict, with traders pricing roughly a 64% chance of cert being granted by the end of 2026.
What it means for NM bettors
Nothing changes for NM today. The five legal tribal sportsbooks — Santa Ana Star, Isleta + BetMGM, Inn of the Mountain Gods, Buffalo Thunder, and Route 66 — continue to operate retail-only. Kalshi remains accessible to NM users despite the May 12 tribal lawsuit because no court has yet issued an injunction against it in NM. That could change as the federal case progresses.