Ninth Circuit denies Kalshi rehearing and tribes secure injunction

KalshiEX lost two rulings on 4 November: the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied its rehearing petition in the Nevada appeal, and that same day federal Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley issued a preliminary order barring Kalshi from offering sports contracts on the lands of two California tribes. The Ninth Circuit denial activates the 28 August panel decision that held sports event contracts are not swaps across the circuit unless Kalshi obtains further injunctive relief; Kalshi has until 2 February 2027 to petition the U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari.

Ninth Circuit denies rehearing and sets panel ruling in motion

On 4 November the order in KalshiEX, LLC v. Assad, No. 25-7516, stated that Judges Ryan D. Nelson, Bridget S. Bade and Kenneth K. Lee "unanimously" voted to deny rehearing in panel and rehearing en banc, and that "no judge has requested a vote" on the en banc petition. The 28 August panel decision held that Kalshi's sports-event contracts are not swaps and affirmed denial of a preliminary injunction against Nevada regulators.

Kalshi filed a rehearing petition on 9 September and submitted follow-up letters asking the court to wait for a revised version of Commodity Futures Trading Commission Rule 40.11 and a proposed rule treating sports-event contracts as swaps. Nevada described those filings as "just another attempt at delay" in its 1 October response. Under federal appellate rules, the mandate issues seven days after rehearing is denied—i.e., 11 November—unless Kalshi moves for a stay of the mandate while pursuing certiorari; no stay motion appears in the record after the 4 November order.

In practice the change is limited in Nevada: the state had been enforcing the ruling since an order of the First Judicial District Court on 18 May and Kalshi accepted geofencing for Nevada in July. The difference is that the rehearing denial allows the panel ruling to apply across the entire Ninth Circuit, including Arizona, Montana and California, where the pending petition had previously blocked its effect.

The injunction against Kalshi on tribal lands in California

On 4 November Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted the tribes' motion in Blue Lake Rancheria v. Kalshi Inc., No. 3:25-cv-06162, and issued an order prohibiting Kalshi Inc. and KalshiEX "on the Tribes' Indian lands any sports contracts," listing sports from baseball to chess and esports. The order requires the tribes to deliver maps of their lands to Kalshi by 13 November and requires Kalshi to report compliance on 25 November.

The single-page order does not state reasons in the text and does not include Robinhood, who is listed as another defendant. Corley had denied a similar injunction in November 2025 before the Ninth Circuit reversed that decision. In the parties' joint status report of 14 October they explained why the tribes sought the order even after Kalshi said it had geofenced the lands: Kalshi said it implemented geofencing with GeoComply and had measures in place since 23 September; the tribes said a member of the Blue Lake Rancheria Gaming Commission executed a trade from within the Rancheria using the app, and so they seek an order they can enforce through contempt.

On 21 October Corley allowed the tribes to add the Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians as a plaintiff and authorized the amended complaint on 4 November. The tribes also plan claims against Robinhood.

Practical consequences: from voluntary geofence to contempt risk

Kalshi had already implemented geofences over Blue Lake Rancheria and Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians, so the order changes the legal consequence of a geofenced trade rather than the conduct required. A trade executed on the rancheria that the tribes attribute to a member of their gaming commission would now constitute violation of a federal order and could lead to contempt proceedings. The tribes have made clear they will test geofence effectiveness.

The order also gives other tribes in the circuit a practical precedent: they can invoke the same 28 August appellate ruling and seek similar relief in their cases.

The CFTC argument moves to the Supreme Court

Kalshi had asked the Ninth Circuit to wait for CFTC rulemaking that could alter the Commodity Exchange Act interpretation. With rehearing denied, that argument now shifts to the U.S. Supreme Court, where New Jersey Flaherty v. KalshiEX is pending and Kalshi's brief is due 7 December. The circuit split between the Third Circuit and the Ninth Circuit over characterization of these contracts is now posed to the Supreme Court if Kalshi seeks certiorari. Jurisdictionally, neither of the 4 November decisions resolves the issue nationwide; they leave the Supreme Court as the clear route for a different ruling in the West.

The 4 November order states that the judges "unanimously" voted to deny rehearing and that "no judge has requested a vote."

Key timeline and upcoming deadlines

• 18 May: First Judicial District Court order in Nevada that prompted state enforcement.

• 28 August: Ninth Circuit panel decision holding sports contracts are not swaps.

• 9 September: Kalshi files rehearing petition.

• 23 September: Kalshi reports geofencing tribal lands using GeoComply.

• 25 September / 12 October: Kalshi communications asking the court to wait for CFTC action.

• 1 October: Nevada calls the petition an attempt at delay.

• 4 November: Ninth Circuit denies rehearing; Judge Corley issues order against Kalshi for two rancherias.

• 11 November: date the circuit mandate would issue if there is no stay of mandate.

• 2 February 2027: deadline for Kalshi to file a certiorari petition to the U.S. Supreme Court.

• 7 December: Kalshi's brief due in Supreme Court docket 26-299.

I write as Renata Quiroga, Betting Markets Correspondent.