Share 
State of Play’s TL;DR
- The Supreme Court’s first case list for the new term did not include any prediction market disputes.
- The High Court is leaving unresolved a split between the Third and Ninth Circuits over whether states can enforce gambling laws against sports event contracts.
The Supreme Court’s first case list of the new term did not include any prediction market disputes, leaving two closely watched cases off the opening docket.
That does not end the issue for the term.
The court could still take up a prediction market case later, but the latest update suggests that is unlikely to happen in the next few weeks.
Two petitions are still in focus
The Supreme Court had been asked to review two cases centered on whether states can apply gambling laws to sports-event contracts.
One petition came from New Jersey, which asked the court to review a Third Circuit ruling. In that case, the Third Circuit ruled that New Jersey could not apply its gambling laws to sports-event contracts.
A second petition came from Robinhood, which asked the Supreme Court to review a Ninth Circuit ruling. In that matter, the Ninth Circuit ruled that Nevada could enforce its sports betting laws.
Why the cases matter
The two appellate decisions point in different directions on state enforcement, which is why the issue has drawn attention across the gambling industry.
For now, there is no new Supreme Court ruling on prediction markets or sports event contracts. The only confirmed development is procedural: the first docket of the term did not include either case.
That means the conflict described in the petitions remains unresolved unless the court decides to accept one of the cases later in the term.
What to watch next
The key question is whether the Supreme Court will eventually grant review in either case. If it does, the court could weigh in on how far states can go when applying gambling or sports betting laws to event-contract products.
Until then, the split between the Third and Ninth Circuits remains in place, with New Jersey and Nevada tied to different appellate outcomes.
Based on reporting by Daniel O’Boyle for In Game.
