Ninth Circuit Denies Kalshi Rehearing as Tribes Secure Injunction

The Ninth Circuit denied panel rehearing and rehearing en banc of KalshiEX, LLC v. Assad on 4 November 2026, removing the stay that had delayed the circuit's 28 August decision that Kalshi's sports event contracts are not swaps. On the same day, US District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley enjoined Kalshi Inc. and KalshiEX from offering sports contracts on the Indian lands of the Blue Lake Rancheria and the Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me‑Wuk Indians.

What the Ninth Circuit order says and what it changes

A three‑sentence order in No. 25‑7516 records that Judges Ryan D. Nelson, Bridget S. Bade and Kenneth K. Lee "unanimously" voted to deny panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, and that "no judge has requested a vote" on the en banc request. The panel had ruled on 28 August that Kalshi's sports event contracts are not swaps and affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction against Nevada regulators.

Kalshi filed a petition for rehearing on 9 September and submitted three further letters asking the court either to rehear the case or to wait for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to finalise a revised Rule 40.11 and a proposed rule treating sports event contracts as swaps; those letters were dated 25 September, 1 October and 12 October. Nevada called Kalshi's requests "just another attempt at delay." The Ninth Circuit did not grant a rehearing.

Under the federal appellate rules the mandate issues seven days after rehearing is denied, on 11 November 2026, unless Kalshi moves to stay it pending a certiorari petition. No stay‑of‑mandate motion appears on the docket after the 4 November order. Kalshi has until 2 February 2027 to petition the Supreme Court.

The practical change in Nevada is limited: the state has been enforcing the ruling since a First Judicial District Court order of 18 May 2026, and Kalshi agreed in July to geofence Nevada. The immediate impact is across the rest of the Ninth Circuit—Arizona, California, Montana, and other Western states—where the pending petition had kept the 28 August decision from taking effect.

The Northern District of California injunction against Kalshi

In Blue Lake Rancheria v. Kalshi Inc., No. 3:25‑cv‑06162, Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granted a preliminary injunction on 4 November 2026 after a status conference. The order bars Kalshi Inc. and KalshiEX from offering "on the Tribes' Indian lands any sports contracts," listing bets on events from baseball to chess and esports.

The order requires the tribes to provide Kalshi maps of their lands by 13 November 2026, and it requires Kalshi to report on compliance by 25 November 2026. The injunction names Kalshi Inc. and KalshiEX but does not enjoin Robinhood, the other defendant. The order is one page and gives no reasons in the text.

Corley had denied an injunction in November 2025 before the Ninth Circuit reversed; the tribes returned with new evidence in a 14 October joint status report. Kalshi told the court it had geofenced the rancherias through GeoComply, with measures in place as of 23 September 2026. The tribes reported that a member of the Blue Lake Rancheria Gaming Commission placed a trade on the Kalshi app while on the Rancheria despite the geofence, and they sought an order that could be enforced through contempt. Kalshi said it was pursuing the report with GeoComply.

On 21 October 2026 the court allowed the tribes to add the Buena Vista Rancheria of Me‑Wuk Indians as a plaintiff; the tribes have also indicated plans to bring claims against Robinhood.

Legal mechanics and next steps to the Supreme Court

Kalshi argued to the Ninth Circuit that ongoing CFTC rulemaking—a 9 October 2026 interim final rule and a notice of proposed rulemaking—should affect the court's reading of the Commodity Exchange Act. With the Ninth Circuit declining rehearing, that argument now moves toward the Supreme Court as the remaining forum for a different national outcome.

New Jersey's pending petition at the Supreme Court (Docket No. 26‑299, Flaherty v. KalshiEX) remains in play; Kalshi's response to that petition is due 7 December 2026. To obtain a stay of the Ninth Circuit mandate Kalshi must demonstrate a substantial question for the Supreme Court, a higher threshold than merely filing a certiorari petition.

For tribes in the Ninth Circuit the combination of the appellate ruling and the district court injunction changes enforcement dynamics. Kalshi had already applied geofencing measures in September 2026, so the injunction converts a voluntary geofence into a federal court order whose breach could expose the platform to contempt proceedings. Every tribe in the circuit can cite the Ninth Circuit decision in litigation or requests for relief.

What this means for the parties named

• KalshiEX, LLC and Kalshi Inc. face an active injunction on two California tribal lands and the imminent issuance of the Ninth Circuit mandate on 11 November 2026.

• The Blue Lake Rancheria, the Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me‑Wuk Indians and the Buena Vista Rancheria of Me‑Wuk Indians have secured joinder and an injunction mechanism; they must supply maps by 13 November 2026.

• The Commodity Futures Trading Commission rulemaking remains a separate federal process that Kalshi cited in its pleas to the Ninth Circuit; the Supreme Court docket will test whether that pending rulemaking affects judicial interpretation.

"unanimously" voted to deny panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, and that "no judge has requested a vote," the Ninth Circuit order says.

The two rulings on 4 November 2026 therefore leave the Supreme Court as the likely route for parties seeking a different national answer on whether sports event contracts are swaps in federal law, while giving tribes an immediate federal enforcement mechanism on their lands.