Louisiana Sues Kalshi and Polymarket Over Event Contracts

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill has sued prediction-market operators Kalshi and Polymarket in state court, seeking a restraining order and an injunction to block event contracts that the state alleges violate its gambling and sports wagering laws.

The suit, announced by Murrill, names the two platforms alongside other operators she described as illegal online gambling businesses. Louisiana is asking a judge for immediate relief — a temporary restraining order and a longer-term injunction — to stop the challenged contracts through court action while the litigation proceeds.

At the core of the complaint is a straightforward legal claim: offering event contracts to Louisiana users runs afoul of the state's gambling and sports betting statutes. The requested relief centers on halting the platforms' activity in the state rather than on monetary penalties. The filing puts the legality of the contracts under state law squarely before a state court judge.

What does the filing actually ask for?

The state's petition seeks two distinct remedies:

• A restraining order to stop the platforms' event-contract activity on an immediate basis
• An injunction to block the contracts for the duration of the litigation

That two-track structure signals Louisiana wants enforcement now, not after a full trial on the merits. It's the standard playbook for a state attorney general who believes ongoing conduct is unlawful every day it continues.

Why does the venue matter?

The case lands in state court, and that's not incidental. Kalshi and Polymarket had already sued Louisiana officials in federal court, creating parallel disputes over the same underlying question — whether event contracts are legal financial instruments or unlawful gambling under state law.

The companies' earlier federal cases and the state's new filing now run on separate tracks:

• The platforms' suits against Louisiana officials proceed in federal court
• Louisiana's enforcement action proceeds in state court

The venue split is a familiar feature of this kind of fight. A state attorney general enforcing her own state's laws in her own state's courts keeps the claims on home turf, where the gambling statutes at issue are interpreted by state judges rather than federal ones.

What are the operational stakes for the platforms?

An injunction, if granted, would force Kalshi and Polymarket to stop offering the challenged contracts to Louisiana users while the case is pending. For platforms whose product is the contracts themselves, that's an operational constraint, not a fine — it goes directly at the business line rather than the balance sheet.

The litigation also tests a question that other states are watching: whether event contracts on sports and other outcomes fall inside state gambling regimes no matter how the products are labeled. Louisiana's position is that they do, and it has taken that argument to a judge rather than a regulator.

For now, the platforms face active litigation on two fronts — their own federal suits against Louisiana officials and the state's enforcement action against them. The next concrete step is the state court's decision on the restraining order request, which will determine whether the challenged contracts must come down in Louisiana while the broader legality fight plays out.