diff --git a/domains/internet-finance/cftc-licensed-dcm-preemption-protects-centralized-prediction-markets-but-not-decentralized-governance-markets.md b/domains/internet-finance/cftc-licensed-dcm-preemption-protects-centralized-prediction-markets-but-not-decentralized-governance-markets.md
index b89b629ed..fa0f32e3c 100644
--- a/domains/internet-finance/cftc-licensed-dcm-preemption-protects-centralized-prediction-markets-but-not-decentralized-governance-markets.md
+++ b/domains/internet-finance/cftc-licensed-dcm-preemption-protects-centralized-prediction-markets-but-not-decentralized-governance-markets.md
@@ -52,3 +52,10 @@ Bipartisan Senate legislation to reclassify sports contracts as gambling demonst
 **Source:** Judge Nelson, Ninth Circuit oral arguments, April 16, 2026
 
 Judge Nelson's Rule 40.11 argument creates a preemption paradox: CFR Rule 40.11 prohibits DCMs from listing gaming contracts unless CFTC grants an exception. Nelson stated: 'You go to a casino to make sports bets' when CFTC attorney argued sports contracts don't involve gaming. If sports event contracts are gaming contracts, then CFTC's own rules prohibit rather than authorize them on DCMs, eliminating the preemption shield. This challenges the claim that DCM registration provides preemption protection—it may instead create a regulatory trap where the authorization framework simultaneously forbids the product.
+
+
+## Extending Evidence
+
+**Source:** MultiState, March 2026
+
+Curtis-Schiff bill scope explicitly targets CFTC-registered DCM platforms while remaining silent on on-chain prediction markets and futarchy governance, confirming the regulatory bifurcation between centralized and decentralized implementations
diff --git a/domains/internet-finance/futarchy-governance-markets-risk-regulatory-capture-by-anti-gambling-frameworks-because-the-event-betting-and-organizational-governance-use-cases-are-conflated-in-current-policy-discourse.md b/domains/internet-finance/futarchy-governance-markets-risk-regulatory-capture-by-anti-gambling-frameworks-because-the-event-betting-and-organizational-governance-use-cases-are-conflated-in-current-policy-discourse.md
index 3eeb31091..152c2ff18 100644
--- a/domains/internet-finance/futarchy-governance-markets-risk-regulatory-capture-by-anti-gambling-frameworks-because-the-event-betting-and-organizational-governance-use-cases-are-conflated-in-current-policy-discourse.md
+++ b/domains/internet-finance/futarchy-governance-markets-risk-regulatory-capture-by-anti-gambling-frameworks-because-the-event-betting-and-organizational-governance-use-cases-are-conflated-in-current-policy-discourse.md
@@ -80,3 +80,10 @@ Norton Rose analysis shows ANPRM comment record lacks futarchy governance market
 **Source:** MultiState legislative tracking, March 2026
 
 Curtis-Schiff bipartisan bill explicitly defines sports event contracts as gambling products requiring state licenses, demonstrating that legislative conflation can override CFTC's technical distinction between derivatives and gambling. The bill's scope limitation (targets DCM platforms, silent on on-chain markets) suggests decentralized futarchy governance may remain outside gambling frameworks even if centralized prediction markets are captured.
+
+
+## Supporting Evidence
+
+**Source:** MultiState, March 2026
+
+Curtis-Schiff bipartisan bill demonstrates that anti-gambling regulatory capture risk extends beyond partisan Democratic AG enforcement to include Republican legislative support, with Curtis (R-Utah) co-sponsoring despite Utah having no major gaming industry stake