Nevada blocks Polymarket, suspends event contracts before Super Bowl
Partial victory for the state regulator imposes a 14-day "shutdown" on the platform. The judge accepted the argument that operating without a license causes irreparable harm to the state's gaming structure, equating prediction markets with illegal betting.
The state of Nevada, considered the "gold standard" of gaming regulation in the United States, has drawn a red line against prediction markets. In a decision that could set a precedent for the rest of the country, Judge Jason D. Woodbury granted a temporary restraining order against Polymarket (operated by Blockratize Inc.), prohibiting the platform from offering its event contracts in the state for a minimum of 14 days.
The measure responds to an urgent request from the Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB), which sued the company on January 15. The timing of the ruling is surgical, as the blockade covers the period of the Super Bowl, the highest betting volume event of the year. This sends a strong message: Nevada will not tolerate operators attempting to circumvent state licensing under the pretext of financial innovation.
"Every day counts": The argument of irreparable harm
The legal battle revolves around the definition of the product. While Polymarket claims to operate under the federal jurisdiction of commodities (overseen by the CFTC), the Nevada regulator maintains that, in practice, event contracts are disguised sports bets.
In its ruling, the court agreed with the regulator, stating there is a "reasonable likelihood" that the State will prevail on the merits of the case. Judge Woodbury was unequivocal in assessing the risk of allowing the platform to remain active during litigation, noting that the harm to Nevada’s "comprehensive regulatory structure" would be severe.
As indicated in the court order, the problem worsens each day Polymarket operates in Nevada outside the Board’s authority. The magistrate reasoned that "one day means more consumers, and more consumers mean more transactions." Therefore, every day literally matters to prevent the erosion of the law. According to specialized attorney Dan Wallach, the platform appears to have already complied with the order by removing its products from the state through geolocation blocking.
The jurisdictional war: CFTC vs. States
This case is the latest chapter in a broader regulatory war in the U.S. Platforms like Polymarket and its rival Kalshi argue that their products are financial derivatives regulated exclusively at the federal level.
However, traditional betting operators (such as FanDuel and DraftKings) and state regulators see this as unfair competition, since these platforms do not pay state licensing fees nor comply with the same consumer protection rules.
Nevada’s decision occurs alongside similar disputes involving Kalshi in Maryland, New Jersey, and Massachusetts. Recently, a federal judge overturned a previous decision and allowed Nevada to enforce cease-and-desist orders against Kalshi. With state courts now closing in on Polymarket as well, the argument of "federal immunity" for prediction markets is beginning to suffer significant defeats in practical terms.
Tags: United States, USA, Polymarket, Polymarket in Nevada