Latest news with #50States
Forbes
27-05-2025
- Business
- Forbes
CFTC's Failure To Enforce ‘Gaming' Contract Ban Could Still Upend Kalshi Sports Betting Lawsuits
(Photo by Mario Hommes/DeFodi Images via Getty Images) By its own admission, Kalshi is offering a sports betting product – across all 50 states. Kalshi has repeatedly advertised its sports-event contracts on social media as 'The First Nationwide Legal Sports Betting Platform'; 'Betting on Kalshi, the first app for legal sports betting in all 50 states'; and 'Sports Betting Legal in all 50 States on Kalshi." (see here and here). Not only does the federal Wire Act criminalize that activity – as it constitutes the interstate transmission of bets or wagers through interstate commerce – but the CFTC's own regulation (Rule 40.11(a)(1)) prohibits the offering of event contracts involving or relating to 'gaming.' Rule 40.11(a)(1) imposes a blanket ban on all event contracts involving 'gaming,' 'war,' 'terrorism,' 'assassination,' and 'activity that is unlawful under State or Federal Law.' The inclusion of the italicized word 'Prohibition' at the outset of the Rule is a dead giveaway. As explained by acting CFTC Chair Caroline D. Pham: Incoming CFTC Chairman Brian Quintenz has likewise acknowledged that Rule 40.11(a)(1) imposes a 'blanket prohibition' on any event contract that involves or relates to 'gaming.' In a May 24, 2021 public appearance before the Federalist Society, then-Commissioner Quintenz was asked whether the CFTC 'is required to prevent the listing of a contract that's considered gambling.' Quintenz's response: 'the regulation we wrote requires us to.' Several months earlier, Commissioner Quintenz wrote that if an event contract 'is found to be an enumerated event contract, then it is subject to the per se prohibition in the regulation.' Or, as he bluntly put it, 'under Regulation 40.11, that means game over.' Kalshi has already conceded that its sports-event contracts involve 'gaming.' In a court document filed last year in its lawsuit with the CFTC, Kalshi asserted that 'the only relevant legislative history . . . confirms that contracts on 'sporting events such as the Super Bowl, the Kentucky Derby, and Masters Golf Tournament' were precisely what Congress had in mind as 'gaming' contracts.'' The 'gaming' category, Kalshi advised the court, 'reaches contracts contingent on games – for example, . . . whether a certain team will win the Super Bowl. It thus functions as a check on attempts to launder . . . sports gambling through the derivatives markets.' (Notably, Kalshi also asserted that 'Congress did not want sports betting conducted on derivatives markets,' adding that 'contracts relating to games have no inherent economic significane" and 'are unlikely to serve any 'commercial or hedging interest'' — a position which is fundamentally at odds with its current litigation posture). At the January 17, 2025 oral argument before the D.C. Circuit – which occurred just six days before it filed its self-certification for sports contracts with the CFTC – Kalshi reaffirmed that 'the legislative history is exclusively about sports when it talks about 'gaming,'' declaring that 'Congress was particularly concerned at the time it enacted this statute about sports betting and that was probably what they were getting at with the word 'gaming.'' (49:50-50:08). Tying Rule 40.11(a)(1) to the Preliminary Injunction Factors If Rule 40.11(a) categorically bans 'gaming' contracts and Kalshi's sports-event contracts fall within that prohibited category, then why isn't it 'game over' for Kalshi in the federal courts? Kalshi has attempted to evade this inquiry by confining its federal court lawsuits against Maryland, Nevada, and New Jersey to a single constitutional question – i.e., whether state sports betting laws are 'preempted' by the Commodity Exchange Act's grant of exclusive jurisdiction to the CFTC over all derivatives contracts traded on CFTC-designated exchanges. According to Kalshi, any inquiry over Rule 40.11(a)(1)'s applicability falls outside the scope of the constitutional question presented, and, in any event, 'reaffirms' the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction over Kalshi's contracts because only the CFTC can enforce its own regulations. Contrary to Kalshi's assertion, Rule 40.11(a)(1) is relevant for several reasons. First, Kalshi itself has injected Rule 40.11(a)(1) into the lawsuits by alleging that its sports-event contracts are 'lawful under federal law.' Further, Kalshi's Head of Markets, Xavier Sottile, submitted a declaration in support of each one of Kalshi's motions for preliminary injunction attesting that Kalshi 'assiduously complied with federal regulations with regard to all of our contracts.' The unique procedural posture of the case also warrants a broader lens. Kalshi is asking the federal courts to grant it the extraordinary remedy of a preliminary injunction – which is essentially an early victory before there is even a trial. To obtain a preliminary injunction, Kalshi must demonstrate the following: (1) a likelihood of success on the merits; (2) a likelihood of suffering irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief; (3) that the balance of equities weighs in its favor; and (4) that injunctive relief is in the 'public interest.' In assessing these factors, the reviewing court can consider a broader range of documents and information, including matters outside the four corners of the complaint. The Fourth Circuit (which covers the Maryland federal courts) has stated that a court ruling on a preliminary injunction motion 'may look to, and indeed in appropriate circumstances rely on, hearsay or other inadmissible evidence when deciding whether a preliminary injunction is warranted.' It does not require much ingenuity to tie Rule 40.11(a)(1) to the various preliminary injunction factors. It's pretty straightforward. The one that immediately jumps out is the 'public interest' prong which is so central to the granting of preliminary injunctive relief. Failure to Enforce Rule 40.11(a)(1) is Contrary to the Public Interest Kalshi may have raised the specter of Rule 40(a)(1) – yet again – in its motion papers filed in the Maryland case. At page 19 of its motion for preliminary injunction, Kalshi contends that the 'public interest' prong of the preliminary injunction standard favors Kalshi because 'the public undoubtedly has an interest in seeing its governmental institutions follow the law.' Ironically, the 'governmental institutions' that Kalshi was calling out with that statement were the Maryland state agencies for not recognizing the preemptive effect of federal law. What an unforced error. If there is any government institution which 'failed to follow the law,' it would be the CFTC, which failed to enforce its own regulation – Rule 40.11(a)(1). As noted above, Rule 40.11(a)(1) prohibits event contracts that involve, relate to or reference 'gaming.' With Kalshi already on record as equating sports-event contracts with 'gaming,' the CFTC was compelled by its own regulation to order Kalshi to discontinue the listing or trading of its sports-event contracts. After all, the CFTC has already determined – through formal rulemaking unanimously approved more than a decade ago – that event contracts involving or 'relating to' gaming are automatically 'contrary to the public interest' without any further public interest review. There is no discretion or wiggle room afforded to the CFTC under Rule 40.11(a)(1). It's a per se prohibition, as acknowledged by both Commissioners Pham and Quintenz. While Kalshi (and others) have argued that Rule 40.11 gives the CFTC the discretion to apply an individualized 'public interest' test to proposed event contracts on a 'case-by-case' basis, the plain language of the Rule squarely refutes that. To that point, Acting Chairman Pham declared in 2022 that 'there is no further public interest test in Rule 40.11(a)(1) . . . . The Commission has no discretion to infer an additional case-by-case public interest test under Rule 40.11(a)(1) because the plain meaning of . . . the rule text is clear and unambiguous.' In other words, it's 'game over' (to use Quintenz's football analogy). I would think that's a pretty pertinent consideration on a motion for a preliminary injunction analysis, which requires consideration of the 'public interest.' Here, the public interest would clearly be disserved by the CFTC's failure to enforce Rule 40.11(a)(1). As several Maryland federal district courts have recognized, 'there is a substantial public interest 'in having governmental agencies abide by the federal laws that govern their existence and operations.'' And the 'public interest' points only one way – at least until Rule 40.11(a)(1) is amended or withdrawn. Until such time, Kalshi's sports-event contracts are barred by Rule 40.11(a)(1). So, if, as Kalshi insists in its motion, there is a strong 'public interest' in ensuring that governmental institutions 'follow the law,' one would expect the State of Maryland (and Judge Abelson) to take note of the CFTC's abject failure to enforce Rule 40.11(a)(1). In doing so, the Court is not being asked to 'enforce' Rule 40.11(a)(1) against the CFTC (as Kalshi argues in its reply brief). Rather, the Court is simply being asked to consider the CFTC's failure to enforce Rule 40.11(a)(1) in the context of Kalshi's motion for preliminary injunction, with an eye towards examining whether granting an injunction to Kalshi would serve the public interest where its sports contracts are barred both by a federal statute (the Wire Act) and by a clear and unambiguous agency rule which the CFTC refuses to enforce. That's well within the Court's purview on a motion for preliminary injunction. Irreparable Harm Negated by Contract Illegality Along the same lines, the illegality of sports-event contracts under both the Wire Act and Rule 40.11(a)(1) undercuts Kalshi's claim of 'irreparable harm' – another prong of the preliminary injunction inquiry. There cannot be any standing to sue – much less 'irreparable harm' – if Kalshi's contracts are not 'lawful.' (Kalshi has alleged that its contracts are 'lawful under federal law' and submitted a declaration attesting to its 'compliance with' CFTC regulations – placing the lawfulness of its contracts under federal law squarely at issue in this litigation). Here, any irreparable harm that Kalshi may have suffered is entirely of its own making. It self-certified its sports-event contracts as being 'in compliance' with CFTC regulations at a time when such contracts were barred by a specific CFTC regulation and just two weeks after was ordered by the CFTC to suspend the listing of its sports contracts pursuant to the same regulation. Instead of seeking preclearance from the CFTC (as it could have done), Kalshi plunged full speed ahead despite its prior acknowledgement in the CFTC case that sports-event contracts involved 'gaming' (or, more specifically, sports betting), have 'no inherent economic significance,' are 'unlikely to serve any 'commercial or hedging interest,'' and conceding that 'Congress did not want sports betting conducted on derivatives markets.' Federal courts have rejected claims of irreparable harm based on the illegality of the underlying contract, characterizing the moving party's quandary as 'a bed largely of its own making' and calling the request for injunctive relief in such circumstances 'ill-suited.' False certification to the CFTC constitutes 'unclean hands' Another way to weave Rule 40.11(a)(1) into the preliminary injunction proceedings is through an 'unclean hands' defense. The doctrine of 'unclean hands' bars equitable relief 'when the party seeking relief is guilty of fraud, unconscionable conduct, or bad faith directly related to the matter at issue that injures the other party and affects the balance of equities.' It all ties back to Kalshi's January 23rd self-certification regarding its initial listing of a sports-related event contract. On page 4 of that document, Kalshi made an affirmative representation that its proposed sports-related event contract 'complies with' the CFTC Regulations. CFTC Regulation 40.11(a)(1) places a blanket prohibition on any event contract that 'involves, relates to, or references' any of the following: 'terrorism, 'assassination,' 'war,' 'gaming,' or an 'activity that is unlawful under any State or Federal law.' In other words, event contracts relating to 'gaming' are per se prohibited under Rule 40.11(a)(1). As a frequent applicant before the CFTC (going all the way back to 2020), Kalshi should be well aware of this Rule, especially since it's prominently displayed on the CFTC's website and Commissioner (and now acting CFTC chair) Caroline D. Pham specifically referred to Rule 40.11 (a)(1)'s blanket prohibition in public statements about Kalshi's prior event contracts. In a letter dated April 1, 2025, U.S. Congress member Dina Titus asked the CFTC to 'consider whether Kalshi made false claims in its self-certification,' in light of Kalshi's prior judicial statements to the effect that sports-based event contracts 'would qualify as prohibited activities under the Commodity Exchange Act and applicable federal regulations.' As a remedy for the alleged 'false statement,' Congresswoman Titus has asked the CFTC 'to stay the trading of [Kalshi's] sports event contracts' while it investigates the matter. States can likewise weaponize the allegedly false statements made in Kalshi's 'self-certification' by arguing to the federal courts that Kalshi is not entitled to a preliminary injunction because it comes to a court of equity with 'unclean hands.' Here, a state could argue that Kalshi has 'unclean hands' (and therefore is ineligible for a preliminary injunction) because it misrepresented to the CFTC that its sports-related event contracts comply with CFTC Regulations, with full knowledge that CFTC Rule 40.11(a)(1) prohibits event contracts relating to 'gaming' and after having previously asserted in prior judicial proceedings that the 'gaming' category includes sports-based event contracts (like the ones at issue here). Further, the alleged misrepresentation concerning sports-related event contracts is directly related to the matter at issue since it involves the same subject. As you can see, the CFTC's non-enforcement of Rule 40.11(a)(1) is far from a non-issue. It bears directly on three out of the four elements of a preliminary injunction – including a 'balancing of the equities' – and should enthusiastically be invoked by states faced with such an extraordinary remedy. Two of the most compelling story lines in the entire Kalshi saga are: (1) Kalshi's complete 180 on the legality of sports-event contracts (as compared with its prior position advanced in the CFTC litigation – I can't recall ever seeing a litigant change its story so dramatically in such a short period of time); and (2) the CFTC's failure to enforce its own regulation. These are winning themes that states should be hammering in their court filings.
Forbes
08-05-2025
- Business
- Forbes
America's Best-In-State Lawyers 2025: Methodology
Getty In the coming months, Forbes will debut its inaugural list of America's Best-In-State Lawyers—a recognition designed to spotlight the finest attorneys in private practice from across all 50 states. As with all such Forbes lists, it is based on a rigorous, multi-stage process of editorial research and analysis to identify the finest in the profession: lawyers with impressive track records in their specialties, leaders in their fields and attorneys most respected by peers and clients. Forbes' methodology and assessment process was designed by an editorial team with broad experience in law practice and knowledge of the legal marketplace. This team identified a wide pool of eligible candidates through interviews with industry insiders, outside nominations, editorial research, and recommendations from an independent advisory board of experts, as well as outreach through law firms and local, state and national bar associations. To qualify for consideration, lawyers were required to be active and licensed. More than two thousand finalists from a variety of backgrounds, specializations and jurisdictions were ultimately considered. The research team conducted in-depth evaluations of each candidate based on a variety of weighted criteria, including: reputation, industry honors, influence on the legal landscape, client list, advocacy performance, practice impact, reviews by peers and clients, credentials and affiliations, thought leadership, pro-bono work, mentorship, and community and/or diversity work. Also assessed were involvement in significant cases, blockbuster verdicts or deals; notable clients or litigation, and volume, variety or type of incoming business. Accolades from state, national and international bar associations, as well as affinity bar groups and other stakeholders and organizations were also evaluated. Although a lawyer's lifetime achievements were considered, emphasis was placed on their most recent accomplishments. Candidates across each of the 50 states were rated, with the number of listmakers in each state determined by proportional representation. The resulting collection of elite lawyers represents those delivering the finest legal representation for their clients across the nation, and a wide array of practice areas. But what they all share are reputations for integrity, records of excellence—and now, Forbes' recognition as the best in the business. As with all Forbes lists, no fee or payment of any kind was required for candidates to be considered or to make the list. For questions about this list, email lawyerlist@
Associated Press
02-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Associated Press
Award-Winning Author Sets Two-Part Multi-State Book Tour
'50 States' Author Richard R. Becker will visit 10 states in 14 days. LAS VEGAS, NV, UNITED STATES, May 2, 2025 / / -- Award-winning author Richard R. Becker will sign copies of his books, ' Third Wheel ' and '50 States,' during a two-part national book tour and road trip encompassing 10 states in 14 days. The first part of the tour will begin at the end of May and include Illinois, Wisconsin, South Dakota, Wyoming, and Utah. The second part is in the planning stages and will include Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, or Iowa between August 25 and 31. 'Third Wheel' is a gritty, heart-wrenching coming-of-age thriller of betrayal, redemption, and the search for hope in the morally gray desert suburbs of 1980s Las Vegas. The novel has received seven literary awards, including best literary thriller of the year in 2024. It is sometimes described as landing somewhere between 'The Outsiders' and 'The Catcher in the Rye.' '50 States' is a collection of short stories that capture the human condition and how perception shapes reality. Together, they provide a character-driven sampling of the American experience over the last 60 years — the kind and the cruel, the heroic and the criminal. The collection has received four literary awards, including best short story collection. Author Richard R. Becker - 2025 Book Tour Schedule, Part 1 May 24 - The Atlas Collective in Moline, Illinois May 25 - Lion's Tooth in Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 27 - Paperbacks and Pieces in Winona, Minnesota May 28 - Barnes & Noble in Sioux Falls, South Dakota May 29 - Books-A-Million in Rapid City, South Dakota May 30 - Bookin' It in Casper, Wyoming May 31 - Barnes & Noble Sandy in Salt Lake City, Utah Becker's book tours generally coincide with cross-country trips to pick up and drop his daughter off at college. She studies art and psychology at Augustana College in Rock Island, Ill., and plays softball for the school. 'This year's book tour is similar to last year, except broken into two parts, one in May and another in August,' said Becker. 'It's a great opportunity for me to meet indie bookstore owners, bookstore managers, and readers in places I may never have had a chance to visit.' In March, Becker visited Barnes & Noble in Reno, Nev. as a warmup for the tour. He sold more than 30 books at the event. Along with Barnes & Noble - Reno, Thistle & Nightshade, an independent bookstore, also carries signed copies of his books in Reno. 'I'm thrilled that the first part of the tour is set, allowing me to make inquiries for the second part of the tour in August,' said Becker. 'While the first signing will be held in Flagstaff, Arizona, the second route was planned to include Kansas stops like Dodge City or Lawrence, as many readers have told me they want to meet more authors.' During book tours, Becker chronicles his trips in real-time across several social networks, including Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok. During the tour, Becker said he will reveal some details about his upcoming second novel, a literary thriller, which is anticipated to be released later this year. When Becker is not writing fiction, he works as president of Copywrite, Ink., a 35-year-old strategic communication and writing services firm. He has many other interests, including travel, acting, and spending time with family. He is married and has two adult children. To follow Richard R. Becker and keep up with his events, announcements, and behind-the-scenes tour moments, visit for social network listings. Find bookstores that carry signed copies of his books at Copywrite, Ink. - Books. Richard R Becker Copywrite, Ink. +1 702-370-8111 email us here Legal Disclaimer: EIN Presswire provides this news content 'as is' without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
CBS News
20-04-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Earth Day rally draws thousands to Minnesota's capitol
An Earth Day rally at the Minnesota State Capitol brought out people advocating for change, but not just for the environment. Between thousands people marched at the "People's Earth Day" rally on Saturday. Marchers carried signs calling for action to support immigrant rights, uphold indigenous sovereignty, protect the land and endangered species, and prevent further climate change. "I chose to come out here today because I really like the idea of having a future," one demonstrator told WCCO. "We can't be drilling and not caring about the environment," said another. "And we have to save science because that's what's going to save the earth." Similar demonstrations were held in cities across the country. Organizers of the 50 Protests, 50 States, 1 Movement say they do not represent any political party. The Minnesota State Patrol estimate between 8,000 and 10,000 marchers took to the capitol grounds.
Fox News
23-02-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
We need Trump's DOGE reforms, but here's what you can do closer to home to create a brighter future
The 2024 election sent a clear signal: Americans are hungry for more opportunity and social mobility to climb the income ladder and build better lives for themselves and their families. Many who went to the polls and pulled the lever for President Donald Trump did so looking for a political savior. His work is exposing the government-funded social engineering of previous administrations, but we must also foster a network of strong social capital to support society as government is appropriately reined in. Social mobility hinges less on presidential policy promises and more on us – individual agency and community. Lost in today's election hysteria is the importance of community-driven problem-solving. Two types of barriers can prevent American flourishing: Artificial barriers created by government policies or regulations, and natural barriers – the personal challenges that prevent individuals from improving their lives. As the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) takes an unsparing look at our federal government, we are starting to see the breakdown of certain artificial barriers. But while such barriers that inhibit career mobility – like restrictive land use regulations, burdensome tax policies, and occupational licensing requirements – can be addressed through regulatory reform, natural barriers present a different type of obstacle. These barriers – such as broken family structures, mental health issues, substance abuse, chronic unemployment, or a lack of meaningful social relationships – are unlikely to be solved (at least not in the long term) by top-down policies or cookie-cutter government programs. Instead, they require self-determination and community support. In addition to practical help from organizations, strong social capital is the engine of social mobility. The Social Capital Project defines social capital as "the web of social relationships through which we pursue joint endeavors – namely, our families, our communities, our workplaces and our religious congregations." It provides individuals with the connections, resources and support they need to overcome natural barriers (and more effectively dismantle artificial ones). The Archbridge Institute's Social Mobility in the 50 States report measures social capital through activities such as volunteering, doing favors for neighbors, attending community events and donating to charity. The fact that charitable donations declined in 2023 is, in many ways, more notable than the shifting of the political tide. If America suffers from a "generosity crisis," as Vox has suggested, that is more consequential for U.S. communities than any single presidential policy. Grassroots organizations help people develop resilience and social capital, enabling more upward mobility, and we see examples of this in local nonprofit organizations. Consider the story of Wendell, who was born with a defective hand. He struggled to take care of himself and his family until he connected with the nonprofit First Step Staffing, which provided Wendell with individualized assistance that helped him secure dignified work. In addition to finding permanent employment, he gained confidence and belief in himself. No longer believing he was limited, Wendell recognized his capabilities and grew his network of support. And that's just one story. Charitable organizations bolster other pillars of social mobility through bottom-up solutions that can meet people where they are more than any top-down approach. Organizations such as the Edwins Leadership & Restaurant Institute and Construction Ready provide a personalized approach for developing people's in-demand skills so they can participate in the labor force, all while offering crucial networks of support that could be more uplifting and better increase social capital than any well-intentioned government bureaucracy. Schools like Vertex Partnership Academies combine character and agency-based learning into their curriculum, helping students discover their dignity and human potential. Even earlier in life, we know that parental engagement is one of the most important catalysts for social mobility. A top-down program offers welfare to parents through social workers who, even though they are doing crucial work, are often not able to tackle natural barriers head-on. In such cases, organizations like Safe Families for Children help kids and families avoid or overcome problems like homelessness, child abuse, domestic violence and medical emergencies by directly creating links between families in need and networks of support. Each of these organizations represents the enterprising and compassionate spirit that can be found in communities across America. They also show the importance of meeting people on the ground – far from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. If grassroots activity declines drastically in 2025, as if community engagement only matters between Labor Day and Election Day every four years, that is a tragedy for people in need. Flourishing requires people to act with their own agency, but that doesn't mean they need to do it alone. Communities must support individuals by strengthening social capital and equipping people to rise above the challenges that stand in their way. Another obstacle for the grassroots to overcome is the difficulty of opening and operating a charity in the first place, as measured by Philanthropy Roundtable's charity regulations index. Areas with more stringent regulations may preclude people from providing or receiving valuable aid. In states like Connecticut, Mississippi, New Jersey, Florida and Pennsylvania, a burdensome regulatory environment makes the charitable sector far less vibrant, and people in need bear the consequences. Real progress begins in America's communities. Americans may want a political savior, but by fostering social capital and supporting charitable organizations, we can truly remove the barriers to upward mobility and create a brighter future for ourselves.
