Sportsbooks are using federally regulated exchanges to offer sports contracts in states where their own books are banned. That may be states’ strongest argument yet that prediction markets are jurisdictional arbitrage, making a Supreme Court fight feel even more inevitable. In its press release for FanDuel Predicts, FanDuel directly said it would offer sports contracts where online betting is illegal, then withdraw them once those states legalize sportsbooks... Overall though, courts keep splitting on whether prediction markets should be regulated federally or at the state level. > The federal side leads 1–0 at the appellate level after Kalshi’s Third Circuit win, but trial courts across the country are divided 4–7. > Today, the Sixth Circuit hears Tennessee and Ohio appeals after two judges in the same circuit reached opposite conclusions. If it rejects the Third Circuit’s reasoning, we get a circuit split. If it backs Kalshi, the federal side moves to 2–0 at the appellate level. Either way, sportsbooks have made this fight too large, and the jurisdictional-arbitrage argument too clean, to end anywhere below the Supreme Court.