Kalshi Ends Donald Trump Jr. Role After Polymarket Stake Increase

By Daniel Okafor

Kalshi ended Donald Trump Jr.’s advisory contract after his venture capital firm, 1789 Capital, increased its stake in rival Polymarket, a Kalshi spokesperson said. The two sides mutually agreed to end the arrangement.

Reuters reported that the decision followed 1789 Capital’s increase in its Polymarket holding earlier in 2026. Donald Trump Jr., son of President Donald Trump, joined Kalshi as an advisor in January 2025, around the time his father took office.

The split came as Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill announced on November 12, 2026, that she had filed suit in Louisiana state court against Kalshi, Polymarket and numerous other online gambling operations. The case made Louisiana the 13th U.S. state to bring an enforcement action against prediction-market platforms, according to the source.

“For too long, they have violated our laws with impunity. No longer: I am seeking an immediate restraining order and an injunction to restore the rule of law in Louisiana,” Murrill said.

Donald Trump Jr.’s ties to Polymarket extend beyond 1789 Capital’s increased holding. He joined the platform’s advisory board in August 2025, when 1789 Capital first invested in the company. Kalshi said discussions about ending his advisory contract began in the summer after 1789 Capital led Polymarket’s most recent funding round.

The report gave neither the size of 1789 Capital’s increased Polymarket stake nor the value of that funding round. The disclosed facts nevertheless establish the commercial conflict that prompted the review: one adviser’s investment firm had added exposure to a direct competitor while he also sat on the competitor’s advisory board.

Kalshi described the ending as mutual and did not announce a contractual dispute involving Trump Jr. His departure removes a figure with direct financial and board interests in Polymarket from Kalshi’s advisory structure. Beyond that exit, the report described no operational changes at Kalshi.

What does the advisor’s exit change?

The separation addresses a conflict inside Kalshi’s advisory arrangements; it does not change either platform’s exposure to the state lawsuits. Louisiana’s case alleges illegal online gambling and seeks an immediate restraining order, while Utah has sued Kalshi and some of its market makers over alleged illegal gambling offered to residents.

Utah has also filed criminal charges against Kalshi, creating a civil and criminal enforcement track. State authorities are treating prediction markets as illegal betting sites. An injunction could restrict how the platforms serve residents in the states that bring enforcement actions.

Louisiana’s suit is broader than a complaint aimed at one operator. It is the first state action to join essentially every prediction-market platform as defendants, according to the source. The case consolidates numerous defendants into one state-court action, and a ruling on Murrill’s requested injunction could influence how other courts address similar gambling-law claims.

Where does the litigation go next?

The source expects the states’ fight with prediction markets to draw intervention from the U.S. Supreme Court. The court already has two filings involving New Jersey and Robinhood before it. Those proceedings may become a reference point for the newer enforcement actions, although the source provided no hearing or ruling dates.

For Kalshi and Polymarket, immediate exposure comes from state-court injunction requests, while Kalshi also faces Utah criminal charges. The next concrete test is whether a Louisiana court rules on Murrill’s request for an immediate restraining order, a decision that could influence how other states pursue similar claims.