Polymarket and Robinhood sue Missouri over sports contracts
The separate federal lawsuits take different approaches, with Polymarket US citing the Commerce Clause and Robinhood the CFTC’s authority over event contracts.
Key takeaways:
- Polymarket and Robinhood have filed separate federal lawsuits against Missouri officials, challenging the state’s attempts to stop them from offering sports event contracts.
- The cases follow cease-and-desist letters issued in September 2026 by Attorney General Catherine Hanaway to Novig, Polymarket US, Robinhood, Kalshi, Underdog and Crypto.com.
- Polymarket US argues Missouri’s licensing requirements violate the Commerce Clause, questions the rule requiring servers in the state, and asks for preliminary and permanent injunctions.
- Robinhood argues sports event contracts are financial products authorised at the federal level, so they fall under the CFTC’s jurisdiction rather than state gambling laws.
US.- Polymarket and Robinhood have filed separate lawsuits against Missouri officials in federal court, challenging the state’s attempts to stop them from offering sports event contracts. The cases follow cease-and-desist letters issued in September 2026 by Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, which threatened enforcement action against several prediction market operators.
Those letters targeted Novig, Polymarket US, Robinhood, Kalshi, Underdog and Crypto.com, demanding that they immediately stop offering sports-related contracts in the state. Hanaway said the contracts constitute unlicensed sports wagering under Missouri law as per the sports betting framework launched in December 2025.
Under Missouri’s current system, licensed online sportsbooks must restrict their operations geographically to the state. They are also required to maintain data centres and corporate infrastructure within its borders, creating a state-specific operating model.
Both companies are contesting Missouri’s position. Polymarket US argues that Missouri’s regulatory and licensing requirements for sports betting operators violate the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution by placing restrictions on interstate commerce. It also questions a Gaming Commission rule requiring licensed operators to keep their servers physically within Missouri.
The complaint also references the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s (CFTC) November 5 impartial access interpretation, which, according to the company, deems geographic restrictions introduced to comply with state gambling laws to be incompatible with exchange regulations.
Polymarket US is asking the court to rule that Missouri’s laws are unconstitutional as applied to its operations and pre-empted by federal law. It is also seeking preliminary and permanent injunctions to prevent their enforcement.
Robinhood’s lawsuit centres on the CFTC’s authority over prediction markets. The company argues that sports event contracts are financial products authorised at the federal level and therefore fall under the regulator’s jurisdiction, rather than state gambling laws.
“Missouri’s position rests on the premise that, despite express federal preemption and the CFTC’s comprehensive regulation of derivatives trading, event contracts listed on CFTC-regulated DCMs and facilitated by CFTC-registered FCMs constitute ‘wagering’ subject to Missouri gaming laws. Federal courts have long recognised that the CFTC’s regulation of the national derivatives market is exclusive and preempts state involvement,” Robinhood counsel wrote in the lawsuit.
Frequently asked questions (FAQs)
- Why are Polymarket and Robinhood suing Missouri? They are challenging the state’s attempts to stop them from offering sports event contracts. The lawsuits follow cease-and-desist letters from Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, who said the contracts constitute unlicensed sports wagering under Missouri law.
- Which prediction markets received Missouri cease-and-desist letters? The letters, issued in September 2026, targeted Novig, Polymarket US, Robinhood, Kalshi, Underdog and Crypto.com. They demanded that the companies immediately stop offering sports-related contracts in the state.
- What is Polymarket US arguing in its lawsuit? It argues that Missouri’s regulatory and licensing requirements for sports betting operators violate the Commerce Clause by restricting interstate commerce. It also questions the rule requiring licensed operators to keep servers in Missouri, and cites the CFTC’s November 5 impartial access interpretation, according to the company.
