North American Derivatives Exchange and Novig both asked federal judges on October 16 to stop Missouri from enforcing its gambling laws against sports event contracts. Kalshi, Polymarket, Robinhood and Underdog received the same order and have not filed.
Two of the six prediction market operators Missouri ordered to stop selling sports event contracts answered in federal court on October 16. North American Derivatives Exchange, or Nadex, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission-registered exchange behind Crypto.com's prediction markets, filed in the Western District of Missouri. Novig filed in the Eastern District through its exchange entity, Ludlow Exchange LLC. Both ask a federal judge to stop the state from enforcing its gambling and sports wagering laws against contracts they say sit under exclusive federal jurisdiction.
The orders they are contesting went out on September 16 and 17, when Attorney General Catherine Hanaway's office sent cease-and-desist letters to Polymarket, Kalshi, Crypto.com, Novig, Underdog and Robinhood, giving each 30 days. The announcement told them to stop offering sports event contracts to Missourians unless licensed by the Missouri Gaming Commission, to pay the required taxes and fees, and to verify ages so that nobody under 21 can bet. "Companies cannot repackage sports bets as 'event contracts' to avoid Missouri law," Hanaway said in the announcement, which warned that failure to comply "will result in enforcement action by the State of Missouri." Missouri voters approved sports betting in 2024 and the licensed market opened on December 1, 2025.
Thirty days from those letters ran out on October 16 and 17. Both suits were filed on the first of those two dates.
Nadex's complaint, filed as case 4:2026cv00969 and reported by The Block from the docket, argues that the Commodity Exchange Act gives the CFTC exclusive jurisdiction over its listed contracts and preempts state gambling law, and it seeks a declaratory judgment and a permanent injunction. It also raises two narrower objections. The letter was addressed to Foris DAX, Inc. rather than the registered exchange that lists the contracts, and Missouri's constitution provides only two direct mobile sports wagering licenses, both of which the state has already awarded. On that reading, the instruction to get licensed has nowhere to go.
Novig asks for a preliminary and a permanent injunction, and for the court to hold the status quo while the Eighth Circuit hears a Kalshi appeal out of Iowa. That request matters because the federal courts have not landed in the same place. The Sixth Circuit ruled against Kalshi's position in September, the Ninth Circuit has also ruled against it, and the Third Circuit sided with it in the decision the NFL has asked the Supreme Court to review. A platform's exposure in any given state currently depends on which circuit that state sits in.
Court records reviewed on Sunday showed no Missouri filing from Kalshi, Polymarket, Robinhood or Underdog. Kalshi was the first of the six to respond to the letters, and the attorney general's office has described ongoing discussions with it. Underdog sued Connecticut in September over a comparable order, so its absence from the Missouri docket is not a general reluctance to litigate.
What licensure would cost is harder to pin down than the demand itself. The attorney general's announcement puts the state's tax at 10 percent of gross receipts. Crypto Briefing, which covered both filings separately, describes the same levy as 10 percent of adjusted gross revenue and puts application fees at up to $500,000. The rate is the same in both accounts. The base is not, and the release does not define its terms, so what an operator would actually owe is not established by either.
Age verification is the one allegation that does not apply evenly across the six. Hanaway's letter to Crypto.com said the platform lets users as young as 18 trade, against a state minimum of 21. Crypto Briefing reported that the office raised age concerns about five of the six recipients, with Novig the exception.
The jurisdictional question both complaints turn on is also open at the federal agency whose authority they are claiming. The CFTC has proposed writing event contracts into the swap definition, which would settle federally whether these products are the derivatives their issuers say they are. Until that rulemaking is final or an appellate ruling settles the question, each operator is deciding state by state whether to fight, negotiate or withdraw. The four Missouri recipients that have not gone to court still face the same demand, and the attorney general's release says non-compliance brings enforcement.
