Polymarket is now the subject of a direct legal action in Nevada, as the state’s gaming regulator seeks to halt the platform’s offering of sports-event contracts inside the state. The case asks a Carson City court to declare the activity unlawful under Nevada’s wagering laws and to order Polymarket to stop offering the products without a license. The civil enforcement action marks a significant escalation in efforts by state authorities to scrutinize prediction market operators as they expand in the United States.

The action stems from Polymarket’s model, which allows users to buy and sell event contracts on a derivatives exchange and prediction market platform. These products are offered through a mobile application and are available to people in Nevada. The state’s gaming regulator views the offering of sports event contracts, and certain other event contracts, as a form of wagering activity that requires a Nevada gaming license. The regulator argues that Polymarket is operating without such a license and is therefore in violation of Nevada law.

Regulator Seeks Court Order to Block Activity

The state’s filing asks the court for a declaration and injunction “to stop Polymarket from offering unlicensed wagering in violation of Nevada law.” The regulator also noted that Polymarket operates a derivatives exchange and prediction market where the event contracts are sold, and that the products are made available to people in Nevada. It considers the offering of sports event contracts, or certain other event contracts, to constitute wagering activity under state statutes, triggering licensing requirements.

Nevada’s gaming policy emphasizes the importance of regulation and licensing. The regulator reiterated in a press release (pdf) that “Nevada’s public policy, as expressed by the Legislature, is that the gaming industry is vitally important to the economy of the state and the general welfare of the inhabitants and therefore must be licensed, controlled, and assisted to protect the public health, safety, morals, good order, and general welfare of the inhabitants of the State.” The legal complaint reflects this policy perspective, as the state seeks court approval to block unlicensed activity.

The case represents the first time a court will rule on Polymarket’s market offerings since the platform’s return to the United States. Other prediction market operators have faced litigation in different states, although earlier disputes often took the form of cease-and-desist orders followed by federal lawsuits. Nevada’s approach differs because the regulator initiated a state-court action directly against Polymarket.

As of the filing, Polymarket had not yet presented its legal arguments defending sports event contracts. In previous cases, competitors such as Kalshi have argued that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has sole jurisdiction over derivatives contracts offered by federally regulated exchanges, and that federal law preempts state gambling statutes. Legal observers note that Polymarket could attempt to remove the Nevada action to federal court, but removal would require satisfying a legal test for complete preemption. State proceedings in Massachusetts have shown that meeting this standard can be difficult.

Suspicious Trading Draws Additional Scrutiny

While the Nevada enforcement action focuses on licensing and state gaming statutes, federal policymakers have raised separate concerns centered on market integrity and national security. Several U.S. senators wrote to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission expressing concerns about “suspicious trading” on Polymarket’s non-registered exchange. Their letter cited reporting that traders on Polymarket appeared to anticipate the imminent capture of Venezuela’s leader, Nicolás Maduro, and that a newly created account purchased event contracts in favor of Maduro’s exit shortly before it occurred. The senators described the episode as an example of the risks of unregulated gaming and insider information.

Their letter questioned whether claiming federal regulatory status could allow prediction markets to bypass state-level gaming rules and integrity oversight. The concerns highlight a larger policy debate around how prediction markets intersect with both financial regulation and gambling regulation as more platforms re-enter the U.S. market.

Polymarket recently resumed U.S. operations through a limited relaunch after previously exiting following a regulatory settlement. The platform’s reentry involved the acquisition of a federally regulated derivatives exchange and clearinghouse and subsequent approval by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Nevada’s enforcement action now tests whether those federal developments shield the platform from state wagering laws or whether state courts will uphold Nevada’s licensing authority over sports event contracts within its borders.