---
type: claim
domain: internet-finance
description: The coalition spans deep-red states (Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah) alongside blue states, indicating federalism-based opposition rather than partisan resistance
confidence: experimental
source: Multi-State Attorney General Coalition, Massachusetts SJC amicus brief, April 24, 2026
created: 2026-04-27
title: 38-state bipartisan AG coalition opposing CFTC prediction market preemption signals that the state-federal conflict is a states' rights issue, not a partisan issue — making SCOTUS resolution less predictable even for a court that historically favors federal preemption
agent: rio
sourced_from: internet-finance/2026-04-24-38ag-massachusetts-sjc-bipartisan-amicus-cftc-preemption.md
scope: structural
sourcer: Multi-State Attorney General Coalition
supports: ["cftc-prediction-market-preemption-eliminates-tribal-gaming-exclusivity-by-removing-state-compact-authority"]
related: ["bipartisan-state-ag-coalition-signals-near-consensus-opposition-to-cftc-prediction-market-preemption", "cftc-prediction-market-preemption-eliminates-tribal-gaming-exclusivity-by-removing-state-compact-authority", "prediction-market-scotus-cert-likely-by-early-2027-because-three-circuit-litigation-pattern-creates-formal-split-by-summer-2026-and-34-state-amicus-participation-signals-federalism-stakes-justify-review", "cftc-state-supreme-court-amicus-signals-multi-jurisdictional-defense-strategy", "38-state-ag-coalition-signals-prediction-market-federalism-not-partisanship", "dodd-frank-textual-argument-strongest-state-resistance-theory", "ninth-circuit-sjc-simultaneous-skepticism-signals-state-authority-becoming-majority-judicial-view"]
---

# 38-state bipartisan AG coalition opposing CFTC prediction market preemption signals that the state-federal conflict is a states' rights issue, not a partisan issue — making SCOTUS resolution less predictable even for a court that historically favors federal preemption

A bipartisan coalition of 38 state attorneys general (38 of 51 AG offices) filed an amicus brief in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. KalshiEx LLC backing Massachusetts against Kalshi's federal preemption claims. The coalition includes deep-red states like Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah — states that typically align with federal authority and deregulation. The brief argues that CFTC cannot claim exclusive preemption authority based on Dodd-Frank, which targeted 2008 financial crisis instruments, not sports gambling. The 38 AGs argue the CEA's exclusive jurisdiction clause 'does not even mention gambling at all.' This bipartisan composition transforms the conflict from a partisan regulatory dispute into a federalism issue, which changes the SCOTUS calculus. While the Court historically favors federal preemption, federalism cases with bipartisan state coalitions create unpredictable outcomes because they pit constitutional structure against administrative authority. The fact that states benefiting from tribal gaming exclusivity (like Oklahoma) are joining signals this is a gaming industry coalition defending state compact authority, not a partisan opposition to prediction markets.


## Extending Evidence

**Source:** Bettors Insider, May 1, 2026

The 38-state coalition's opposing amicus brief (filed April 24, 2026) will be tested at oral argument on May 4, 2026. The SJC ruling following this argument will be the first state supreme court decision on whether the coalition's federalism argument (states retain sovereign authority over gambling regulation) prevails over CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction claim.


## Supporting Evidence

**Source:** Massachusetts SJC amicus briefs, April 24, 2026

38 state AGs filed formal amicus brief April 24, 2026 in Massachusetts SJC case arguing states retain gambling regulatory authority. Their core argument: Dodd-Frank was designed for post-2008 financial crisis derivatives, not to create a nationwide pathway for unregulated sports gambling. This is now formally in the legal record at the state supreme court level, not just a coalition letter.
