A new survey commissioned by the Prediction Market Coalition and shared with The Block on June 25 shows that both Republican and Democratic voters favor a single federal framework for regulating prediction markets: the Republican voter survey found 48% support a federal framework; the Democratic voter survey found 45% support a federal framework.
48% of Republicans in poll support federal framework; over half of voters under 35 interested in prediction markets
The Prediction Market Coalition's memo aggregates data from two polls: a Republican voter survey by Fabrizio Lee & Associates showed 48% support a unified federal regulatory framework and 27% prefer individual state regulation; an independent voter survey by Global Strategy Group showed 45% of Democrats support a federal framework and 35% support state regulation. In both surveys, a majority of respondents from each side supported the view that "consumers should have the right to choose whether to participate in prediction markets."
By age, the Global Strategy Group survey found that more than half of respondents under 35 said they were interested in or already using prediction markets, making them the most receptive age group.
Kalshi sues over Illinois licensing law; CFTC sues Kentucky
On Tuesday, Kalshi filed a lawsuit against Illinois Governor JB Pritzker and other state officials over a new state law requiring prediction market operators to obtain a state license, arguing the law conflicts with federal law.
On the same day, the CFTC filed a lawsuit against Kentucky—after Kentucky regulators accused Kalshi, Polymarket, and other companies of operating illegal sports betting platforms. CFTC Acting Chairman Michael Selig said the CFTC has "exclusive jurisdiction" over prediction markets; states insist that sports event contracts violate local gambling laws.
Sports law attorney Daniel Wallach criticizes poll framework for ignoring sports betting issues
Sports law attorney Daniel Wallach criticized the poll framework on X, arguing the survey overlooked sports betting—which is at the heart of the current dispute. He wrote: "Sports betting disguised as 'trading' is the core of the dispute between the U.S. and prediction markets. Omitting this crucial detail in polling is disingenuous."
Frequently Asked Questions
Who commissioned the two polls, and what are the differences in the survey populations?
Both polls were commissioned by the Prediction Market Coalition, targeting different political groups: Fabrizio Lee & Associates conducted the Republican voter survey; Global Strategy Group conducted the independent voter survey for Democrats. The results were shared via a memo with The Block on June 25, 2026.
What are the legal bases for Kalshi and the CFTC lawsuits against states?
Kalshi argues that the Illinois law requiring a state license conflicts with federal law; the CFTC, as a federal agency, is suing Kentucky, asserting "exclusive jurisdiction" over prediction markets, which preempts state regulation. The opposing state argument is that prediction contracts based on sports events violate local gambling laws.
Why is sports betting the core dispute in the federal-state regulatory battle over prediction markets?
The CFTC and prediction market platforms characterize sports event contracts as financial derivatives subject to federal CFTC jurisdiction, not state gambling laws. Sports law attorney Wallach criticizes this characterization as controversial, arguing that characterizing sports betting as "trading" to circumvent state gambling laws is a point of contention, and that a significant volume of prediction market trades are essentially sports betting.
