Can prediction markets advertise in every US state?

What did the CFTC announce on 5 Nov 2026?

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issued an interpretation of its impartial access rule, Regulation 38.151(b). That rule says designated contract markets (DCMs), the federally registered exchanges that list event contracts, must give members and people with trading privileges "competitive, open, fair, and impartial access" (CFTC press release, 5 Nov 2026).

The key line: DCMs "must cease domestic geographic restrictions that violate the Impartial Access Requirements within 30 days, or else submit to the Division of Market Oversight ... an explanation for why such compliance is not feasible." Within the same 30 days, DCMs should make sure intermediaries such as brokers are not impeding that access, or explain why they cannot. The CFTC says it "will consider the facts and circumstances of any particular case" (CFTC).

Chairman Michael Selig put the reasoning plainly: "Geographic access restrictions are inconsistent with those purposes and the Act's impartial access requirements" (CFTC). The guidance argues that cutting out states can thin liquidity, and it says election markets "may be particularly sensitive" because the most informed trading may come from residents of the state holding the election (CFTC interpretation; CoinDesk, 6 Nov).

Three details matter for planning:

• The deadline. Counted from the 5 Nov release, 30 days lands around 5 Dec. The interpretation itself says it takes effect on publication, so confirm the exact date with counsel (CFTC interpretation).
• There is an exit. An exchange can explain why it cannot comply instead of switching states back on. The CFTC has not said which explanations it will accept (InGame, 6 Nov; SBC Americas, 6 Nov).
• No exchange is named. The release and guidance do not name any exchange or intermediary (RG).

CoinDesk reports that the commission currently has a single sitting member, the chairman, so its actions are issued unilaterally (CoinDesk).

Why does the order clash with the courts?

Because several courts have ordered the opposite. CoinDesk reports that Kalshi customers in Nevada, Washington and Michigan had been geofenced while those disputes run, and InGame reports that Kalshi's sports contracts are banned by court orders in those three states, with the company pulling them from Utah after criminal charges there (CoinDesk; InGame).

Underneath sits one question the courts have not settled: is a sports event contract a federally regulated swap, or a bet that states can license? The federal appeals courts are split (Foley & Lardner, 2 Nov 2026):

• Third Circuit (New Jersey): ruled for Kalshi in April 2026, finding sports event contracts likely qualify as swaps. New Jersey has asked the Supreme Court to hear the case (CNBC, 25 Sept). RG reports that 39 states and the District of Columbia have urged the Court to take it (RG, 4 Nov).
• Ninth Circuit (Nevada): ruled 3-0 on 28 Aug 2026 that Nevada can likely regulate Kalshi's sports contracts as sports bets (Ninth Circuit opinion; Reuters). The court pointed to geofencing as a practical way to comply with both regimes (Foley).
• Sixth Circuit (Ohio and Tennessee): ruled against Kalshi on 25 Sept 2026. Kalshi asked the full court to rehear it on 9 Oct (Foley; CNBC).
• Second Circuit (New York and Connecticut): on 3 Nov 2026 it refused Kalshi and Coinbase injunctions pending appeal, so those states are not barred from enforcing their gambling laws while the appeals run (RG).
• Fourth Circuit (Maryland): Kalshi's appeal, KalshiEX v. Martin, is still awaiting a decision (Foley).

Foley's view is that Supreme Court review "appears likely". Until then, the map is set state by state.

Which states are restricting prediction markets right now?

This is a snapshot, not a complete list. It focuses on actions that change what a marketer can target or say.

Two patterns stand out. First, states are going after marketing as well as access: Washington's court called the "provision, marketing, and advertising" of the covered contracts unfair or deceptive, according to the Attorney General (Washington AG). Second, contract type matters. Most orders target sports contracts; Washington's also covers elections, culture and mentions.

Can prediction markets advertise on Google and Meta?

Google has a dedicated prediction markets policy (checked 9 Nov 2026). In the US, only two kinds of advertiser qualify: a CFTC-authorised DCM whose primary business is listing exchange-listed event contracts, or an NFA-authorised brokerage offering access to one. Google certification is required, with a separate application for each location. The approved location is "United States (excluding Connecticut, Michigan, Nevada, New York, and Ohio)" (Google Ads policy).

Google also disallows ads for informational or educational sites and blogs "that provide signals for the trading of Exchange-Listed Event Contracts", including affiliate sites with broker reviews. Election content falls under its separate political content rules (Google Ads policy).

Note the gap. Washington is not on Google's excluded list, yet a Washington court order restricts advertising there. Google's policy says advertisers must research and follow local rules themselves. Platform eligibility is not legal permission.

Meta has no prediction market section on its gambling policy page (checked 9 Nov 2026). It defines online gambling as any product where "anything of monetary value is included as part of a method of entry and prize", requires authorisation through Meta Business Suite with evidence the activity is licensed or lawful where you target, and bars targeting under-18s. The policy also covers affiliate landing pages that promote gambling (Meta Online Gambling and Games). Our reading is that real-money event contracts are likely to be treated under this policy. Confirm with Meta before you build a plan around it.

Can creators and affiliates promote prediction markets?

Federal endorsement rules apply whatever the product. The FTC's Endorsement Guides say a material connection between a creator and the brand must be disclosed "clearly and conspicuously" when the audience would not expect it. That includes payment, free products, and "the possibility of being paid, of winning a prize" (16 CFR 255.5).

The brand carries risk too. Advertisers can be liable for misleading endorsements or undisclosed connections "even when the endorser is not liable", and are expected to guide, monitor and correct their endorsers (16 CFR 255.1(d)).

For prediction markets that means four things in practice:

• Disclose every paid or referral relationship, on the post itself, in plain words.
• Keep creators to explaining markets. No "bet on anything" or "easy money" framing, no implied returns, and no suggestion that a product is legal where a court says it is not. Washington's Attorney General cited an ad joking about finding "a way to bet on the NFL even though we live in Washington" as an example of misleading marketing (Washington AG).
• Match the creator's audience to where the product is available. A creator with a large Michigan or Washington audience is a harder fit for sports contracts, because geotargeting a creator's followers is not possible.
• Avoid trading tips. Google already bars ads for sites that give trading signals, and signal content invites scrutiny on manipulation and insider trading.

What should marketers do before the deadline?

Use this as a working checklist with your legal team.

1. Map availability by product, not by brand. Record which contract types (sports, elections, economics, culture, mentions) are live in each state, and on which tribal lands they are not.
2. Separate eligibility from permission. Google certification and Meta authorisation tell you where a platform will run ads. Court orders and state law tell you where you can.
3. Build state and sub-state exclusions into every channel. Paid search, paid social, programmatic, creators, newsletters and community events.
4. Do not switch targeting back on because of the CFTC order. Whether an exchange reopens a state is a legal decision for the exchange. Marketing should follow what the exchange is actually offering, not what the regulator says it should offer.
5. Write creator briefs with a state exclusion and takedown clause, plus FTC disclosure wording and a list of banned phrases.
6. Set an age floor. Meta requires 18+ at a minimum for gambling ads. Arkansas's complaint highlights access for users as young as 18, so check whether a higher age is expected where you target (Arkansas AG).
7. Keep risk disclosures in creative and landing pages. Disclosure is now part of at least one state complaint.
8. Moderate community spaces. Discord, Telegram and X replies can carry tips, referral links and location workarounds. Set rules and remove them.
9. Keep a refresh log. Date every targeting decision and the source behind it. Recheck before each flight, and at minimum around the CFTC's 30-day mark and any Supreme Court decision on hearing the cases.

What could change next?

Several things are in play: the CFTC's 30-day window and how it treats explanations from exchanges; the Fourth Circuit's Maryland decision; whether the Supreme Court takes the New Jersey case; and the CFTC's own rulemaking on how event contracts and "gaming" are defined (Foley). Congress may act as well. CNBC counts nearly 30 prediction market bills introduced since 2025, none passed, and reports that a change of control after the midterms could bring more oversight (CNBC, 28 Oct). CNBC discloses a commercial relationship with Kalshi.

We will update this page as courts and regulators act.