Washington Files Lawsuit Against Kalshi Over Illegal Gambling Claims

(AsiaGameHub) –   Washington has initiated a fresh legal challenge against Kalshi. State Attorney General Nicholas Brown filed a lawsuit on Friday, requesting a court order to halt the platform’s operations within Washington.

---

Good to Know

• Washington alleges Kalshi is providing illegal gambling, not legitimate trading.
• The state is seeking a permanent injunction, financial penalties, and the return of funds linked to its local activities.
• The legal action relies on some of the nation’s strictest gambling regulations.

---

Washington Says Kalshi Crossed the Line

The legal complaint was submitted in King County Superior Court. Brown contends that Kalshi is conducting unlawful gambling in Washington and must be prohibited from operating there. The filing also aims to reclaim any profits Kalshi is accused of making from its Washington business. Additionally, the state demands civil penalties for every alleged breach of the Consumer Protection Act and the Gambling Act.

Brown was unequivocal in his assessment of the platform, stating:

“Kalshi encourages people to wager on nearly every conceivable life event—election results, Supreme Court rulings, even wars. To Kalshi, every occurrence and tragedy is merely an opportunity for Americans to gamble their money and for Kalshi to profit. While promoting this grim outlook, they enrich themselves and congratulate each other for circumventing Washington’s gambling statutes. That ends now.”

This rhetoric is significant, as Washington has a longstanding, stringent stance against gambling. While some forms are permitted on tribal lands, they are prohibited elsewhere in the state. The legal foundation is also deeply rooted. Washington’s 1889 state constitution forbade gambling on state lands upon its entry to the union. Legislators subsequently enacted a ban on internet gambling in 2006.

Kalshi and similar prediction market platforms typically maintain that their contracts constitute trades, not wagers. However, this defense may encounter difficulties in this case. Washington law defines gambling as “staking or risking something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event,” a formulation that seems sufficiently wide to encompass prediction contracts in this dispute.