---
type: source
title: "Arizona files first-ever criminal charges against prediction market Kalshi — 20 counts including illegal gambling and election wagering"
author: "Arizona AG Kris Mayes (via CoinDesk, Axios, AP)"
url: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2026/03/17/arizona-attorney-general-charges-kalshi-with-illegal-gambling-election-betting
date: 2026-03-17
domain: internet-finance
secondary_domains: []
format: article
status: enrichment
priority: high
triage_tag: claim
tags: [prediction-markets, regulation, criminal-charges, arizona, kalshi, gaming, election-betting, futarchy]
flagged_for_leo: ["Escalation from civil to criminal enforcement — this changes the risk calculus for all prediction market operators and by extension futarchy governance"]
processed_by: rio
processed_date: 2026-03-18
enrichments_applied: ["futarchy-governed entities are structurally not securities because prediction market participation replaces the concentrated promoter effort that the Howey test requires.md"]
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
---

## Content

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes filed 20 criminal counts against KalshiEx LLC and Kalshi Trading LLC on March 17, 2026. This is the FIRST-EVER criminal charge against a prediction market platform in the US.

**The 20 Counts:**
- Operating an unlicensed gambling business (multiple counts)
- Election wagering (4 counts) — explicitly banned in Arizona
- Sports-related event contracts

**Specific Contracts Cited:**
- Bets on 2028 presidential race
- Bets on 2026 Arizona gubernatorial race
- Bets on 2026 Arizona Republican gubernatorial primary
- Bets on 2026 Arizona Secretary of State race
- Various sports-related event contracts

**Arizona Laws Cited:**
1. Ban on operating unlicensed wagering businesses
2. Outright prohibition against betting on elections

**Kalshi's Response:**
"States like Arizona want to individually regulate a nationwide financial exchange, and are trying every trick in the book to do it." Emphasized that "Kalshi is subject to federal jurisdiction."

**Context:**
- Arizona filed criminal charges just days after Kalshi preemptively sued Arizona in federal court
- AG Mayes is a Democrat — partisan dimension to the state pushback (Trump-appointed CFTC chair Selig supports prediction markets)
- This came 5 days after CFTC issued advisory + ANPRM asserting exclusive jurisdiction
- Total Kalshi litigation: 19 federal lawsuits (8 state offensive, 6 Kalshi offensive, 5 consumer class action)

**Significance of Criminal vs Civil:**
Previous state actions (Nevada, Massachusetts, Maryland) were civil enforcement. Criminal charges escalate the stakes dramatically:
- Criminal conviction carries penalties beyond fines
- Creates personal liability risk for executives
- Signals that some states view prediction markets as criminal enterprises, not just unlicensed businesses
- May deter other platforms from operating in hostile states

**Election Betting Dimension:**
The election wagering charges introduce a new vector. The CFTC's withdrawal of its 2024 proposed rule had opened the door to election contracts. Arizona's election betting prohibition is a state law that may survive even if federal preemption is upheld for sports contracts — different statutory basis.

## Agent Notes
**Triage:** [CLAIM] — "State escalation from civil to criminal enforcement against prediction markets represents a qualitative shift in regulatory risk because criminal charges create personal liability that deters platform operators regardless of the federal preemption outcome"

**Why this matters:** Criminal charges change the game theory. Even if Kalshi ultimately wins on federal preemption, the threat of criminal prosecution in hostile states changes the risk calculus for platform operators. For futarchy: any futarchy governance market that could be construed as "gaming" or "election wagering" faces not just civil injunction but potential criminal liability in certain states.

**What surprised me:** The election wagering charges. I had been tracking the sports contract issue, but the election betting dimension introduces a separate legal vector. Arizona's election betting prohibition has a different statutory basis than its gaming laws — federal preemption of gaming regulation might not reach election-specific prohibitions. This matters for futarchy because futarchy governance proposals can look like "election wagering" (betting on the outcome of a governance vote).

**KB connections:**
- Extends the prediction market jurisdiction crisis documented in Session 2
- Challenges Belief #6 — even stronger than civil enforcement as a threat to regulatory defensibility
- Connects to [[futarchy-based fundraising creates regulatory separation]] — the separation argument doesn't address the gaming/election betting classification

**Extraction hints:** Separate the sports gaming issue from the election betting issue. These are two different legal vectors with different preemption dynamics. The election betting dimension may be MORE relevant to futarchy than the sports gaming dimension.

## Curator Notes
PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[futarchy-governed entities are structurally not securities because prediction market participation replaces the concentrated promoter effort that the Howey test requires]] — but being "not a security" doesn't help if the mechanism is classified as criminal gambling
WHY ARCHIVED: First criminal charges against a prediction market — qualitative escalation in regulatory risk with direct implications for futarchy governance viability


## Key Facts
- Arizona filed 20 criminal counts against KalshiEx LLC and Kalshi Trading LLC on March 17, 2026
- The charges include multiple counts of operating an unlicensed gambling business and 4 counts of election wagering
- Specific contracts cited: 2028 presidential race, 2026 Arizona gubernatorial race, 2026 Arizona Republican gubernatorial primary, 2026 Arizona Secretary of State race
- Arizona AG Kris Mayes is a Democrat
- Kalshi has 19 federal lawsuits total: 8 state offensive, 6 Kalshi offensive, 5 consumer class action
- Previous state actions (Nevada, Massachusetts, Maryland) were civil enforcement, not criminal
- Arizona filed criminal charges days after Kalshi preemptively sued Arizona in federal court
- This came 5 days after CFTC issued advisory + ANPRM asserting exclusive jurisdiction
