CFTC Chairman Mike Selig defends federal jurisdiction over prediction markets, in contrast with state-level gambling regulations.
The chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Mike Selig, told CoinDesk that the agency will continue to defend its “exclusive regulatory authority” over prediction markets in court. The statements came on the sidelines of the Digital Assets and Emerging Tech Policy Summit organized by Vanderbilt University and the Blockchain Association, on April 6, 2026, in Nashville.
Selig clarified the CFTC’s position toward states that have attempted to regulate prediction markets as forms of gambling. “It doesn’t matter if it involves sports, politics, or anything else; if it’s a validly offered product within a CFTC-regulated exchange, then we regulate it,” he stated. The regulator has already filed lawsuits against Arizona, Illinois, and Connecticut, arguing that these states do not have the power to override federal oversight and replace derivatives laws with gambling regulations.
A significant development for the industry came on Monday, when the Third Circuit Court issued a ruling requiring the CFTC to oversee prediction markets, reinforcing the agency’s position. Selig also noted that the CFTC has filed an amicus brief in a consolidated case before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which includes Nevada and Massachusetts – two states that have obtained preliminary injunctions against prediction market providers – and that the case will be heard next week. When asked why the CFTC has not yet sued these two states, Selig responded: “I would not say that, just because these are the first states, they will be the last.”
On the regulatory front, the issue revolves around the Dodd-Frank Act, which grants the CFTC the power to regulate swaps and to block certain types of contracts when they are contrary to the public interest. Excluded categories include war, terrorism, assassination, gambling, and illegal activities. Selig emphasized that, even where a public interest analysis is required, this does not remove the product from the CFTC’s exclusive authority. “Even if we have to conduct a public interest analysis, or choose to do so, that does not mean it falls outside our exclusive regulatory authority,” he said.
Alongside the legal disputes, the CFTC is launching a formal rulemaking process to clarify its oversight of prediction markets. “We are open to suggestions on how that process should be structured and how to evaluate it,” Selig stated. The agency is also examining the specific Dodd-Frank Act provision on the matter.
