Cedar Falls secures first state softball trip ever
The Tigers earned a Class 5A regional title with a 7-6 victory over Iowa City High. They will now head to Fort Dodge to compete in the state quarterfinals along with seven other qualifiers.
Advertisement
After Monday featured regional championships in 1A and 2A, it was time for 3A, 4A and 5A to take to the diamond Tuesday.
MORE: Wapsie Valley ends lengthy drought to reach state softball tournament
For Cedar Falls, it took all seven innings, as they held a 7-3 lead before the Little Hawks stormed back on a three-run homer by Eve Vitenese. But, according to Chad Harberts, Lexi Trueg struck out the next three to secure the win.
Joining the Tigers in 5A will be defending state champion Pleasant Valley, Ankeny Centennial, Linn-Mar, Dowling Catholic, Waukee Northwest, Southeast Polk and West Des Moines Valley, who finished second a year ago.
Advertisement
The 4A field will include No. 1 Cedar Rapids Xavier, ADM, Dallas Center-Grimes, North Scott, Western Dubuque, North Polk, Norwalk and Pella. There will be a new champion, as 2024 winner Carlisle was knocked out earlier in the postseason.
Williamsburg is the defending 3A champion and earned a 9-0 win over Eagle Grove. Completing that field will be Dubuque Wahlert, Albia, Center Point-Urbana, PCM, Washington, West Liberty and Estherville-Lincoln Central, who survived vs. Algona in 12 innings, 3-2.
MORE HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Matt Wallner's RBI single
Matt Wallner grounds a base hit into center field, scoring Austin Martin and giving the Twins an early 1-0 lead
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kalshi Loss in Maryland Could Pave the Way for Supreme Court Review
A federal judge in Maryland on Friday ruled against the prediction market operator Kalshi on whether states can use sports betting laws to regulate the company's sports-based event contracts. The decision conflicts with interpretations by federal judges in Nevada and New Jersey. Kalshi immediately appealed U.S. District Judge Adam B. Abelson's denial of the company's motion for a preliminary injunction against Maryland's lottery and gaming control agency and commission to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The move sets in motion the possibility of an eventual review by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court would decide which federal court has correctly interpreted the disputed interplay between federal and state laws in the context of sports wagering and sports-event contracts. More from Ex-Stanford Coach Taylor Sues ESPN for Defamation After Firing Deflated Balls Artist Sues Pelicans Over Instagram Posts Quintenz's CFTC Nomination Paused by White House Intervention As Sportico detailed in April, Kalshi scored victories before federal judges in Nevada and New Jersey that prevented those states gaming' commissions from requiring Kalshi to obtain licenses. The Maryland decision capped a challenging week for Kalshi, which also saw board member Brian Quintenz's bid to lead the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) paused by the White House. Meanwhile, chief rival Polymarket recently signaled its intent to return to the U.S. with the pricey acquisition of a CFTC-registered exchange, a development that could limit Kalshi's growth ceiling regardless of outcomes in the courtroom. Before Abelson rejected Kalshi's arguments, U.S. District Judge Andrew P. Gordon and U.S. District Judge Edward S. Kiel, respectively, had agreed with the company that federal law appears to preempt states from regulating sports-event contracts. That is true even if sports-event contracts bear similarity to sports bets. Prediction markets such as Kalshi, which have gone live in all 50 states this year, enable users to place 'yes' or 'no' trades on subjects such as whether an MLB team will become the 'Pro Baseball Champion.' Prices for those contracts vary by team and are set by the market in a way that many states and tribal groups contend resembles odds-making. Kalshi insists that it is a distinct product from gambling because odds aren't being set in the same fashion as sportsbooks, though it has at times appeared to undermine its argument here through its marketing materials. At preliminary stages in the litigations, Gordon and Kiel agreed with Kalshi that its legal arguments are enhanced by the CFTC. The CFTC is an independent federal agency created by the Commodity Exchange Act of 1936 (CEA), a statute that has been amended several times. The CFTC enjoys exclusive jurisdiction to regulate commodities and futures on designated exchanges, is intended to craft uniform and national set of regulations for futures markets and has cleared Kalshi to offer prediction contracts under new leadership this year. While Nevada and New Jersey insisted that CEA's exclusive jurisdiction doesn't extend to sports-event contracts, the judges concluded that CEA doesn't explicitly say that, and that CFTC has implicitly allowed Kalshi to offer sports-event contracts. But Abelson, the Maryland judge, offered a contrasting viewpoint of Kalshi's activities. He highlighted that while Congress envisioned a substantial role for the CFTC, it also 'expressed a concern that some event contracts' would be 'contrary to the public interest.' Abelson further noted that while Kalshi self-certified (which the CEA authorizes) its sports-event contracts earlier this year, it could have instead 'requested pre-approval from the Commission regarding whether Kalshi could lawfully conduct sports betting on its platform.' During President Joe Biden's term, the CFTC contested Kalshi over its range of event contracts, which also include the ability for users to put money on elections. The agency's outlook on Kalshi changed with President Donald Trump taking office and Caroline Pham, a Republican, becoming the agency's interim chair. In May, the CFTC voluntarily dismissed an appeal of a 2024 court decision that allowed Kalshi to offer contracts on the 2024 election. As Maryland's gaming enforcers see it, 'event contracts based on the outcome of sporting events' are simply a form of sports wagering. In Maryland, sports wagering is a regulated activity that, under a state statute, is defined as 'the business of accepting wagers on any sporting event by any system or method of wagering, including single-game bets, teaser bets, parlays, over-under, moneyline, pools, exchange wagering, in-game wagering, in-play bets, proposition bets, and straight bets.' Kalshi maintains Maryland law doesn't apply to sports-event contracts because state law is preempted by the CEA. Maryland disagrees, asserting that sports-event contracts don't fall within the meaning of the CEA, and that even if they do, the CEA doesn't preempt Maryland's sports betting laws. Central to the debate is the Supremacy Clause found in Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. The Clause establishes that the Constitution and laws of the U.S. 'shall be the supreme Law of the Land.' The Supremacy Clause allows the federal government to preempt states on certain types of legal questions. On the other hand, as Abelson detailed, Congress has also 'long recognized states' authority to regulate gambling conducted within their borders' because gambling can be 'vice activity' that imposes 'social costs' on states. This tension underscores much of the legal debate surrounding Kalshi's sports-event contracts. Abelson concluded that while CEA generally preempts state regulation of prediction markets, he wasn't persuaded that Congress 'clearly and manifestly intended to strip states' of the ability to regulate a company 'offering . . . wagering opportunities' and in turn require that company to gain state approval via a license. In that same vein, Abelson distinguished CEA having 'some' preemptive effect from a more expansive preemption of 'state gambling laws and specifically sports wagering laws.' He cited other cases for the precedent that courts must avoid 'interpreting the scope of the preempted field too broadly.' Abelson was also moved by the potential repercussions of siding with Kalshi on other industry actors. To that point, a group of tribes and gaming associations filed an amicus brief urging Abelson to side with Maryland. As the tribes see it, federal, state and tribal gaming laws apply to sports event contracts. Striking a supportive position of the tribes and gaming associations' concern, Abelson worried that an interpretation of the CEA as preempting state gambling laws for Kalshi contracts 'would necessarily mean that the CEA impliedly (albeit partially) overrides the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.' This act, better known as IGRA, is central to a lawsuit brought last month by three tribal groups from California against Kalshi. IGRA established a system for reservations to launch, oversee and retain revenue from gaming—including sports betting—on their lands. Federal courts in different circuits reaching conflicting interpretations of law has problematic implications that sometimes attract the attention, and willingness, of the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene. The primary worry with circuit splits is that legal rights and obligations for people, businesses and government agencies vary based on which circuit they reside and where a legal dispute is litigated in the U.S. Here, the question of whether Kalshi's offerings ought to count as sports bets is the headline. However, the meat of the dispute is how a court should interpret a federal law that, through clearly contested language, preempts states from regulating an activity. Best of College Athletes as Employees: Answering 25 Key Questions
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Game Recap: Valkyries 73, Sky 66
Veronica Burton scores 18 points with 10 assists, Iliana Rupert adds four triples with a career-high of 14 points, as the Valkyries top the Sky 73-66.
