The state of New York will not enforce its cease-and-desist order against Kalshi until a court rules on whether to grant the prediction market an injunction.
In a stipulation and order filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New York Tuesday, both parties agreed on a timeline for parts of the case.
As part of that agreement, the state said that it “will refrain from taking enforcement action” against Kalshi until the Court makes a decision on an injunction.
NY-No-Enforcement-10.28.25The state must respond to Kalshi’s original request for an injunction by Nov. 26. Kalshi will then have until Dec. 15 to reply to that response.
The parties have also requested oral argument, but a date for this has not yet been set.
Given the timeline, a decision this year appears unlikely.
Kalshi sued New York early Monday morning, after receiving a cease-and-desist order on Friday evening from the New York State Gaming Commission, which argues that the prediction market is offering illegal sports betting. As in other states, Kalshi argues that state gambling laws are not relevant because it is governed only by the federal Commodities Exchange Act.
Mirrors other states
The decision not to enforce the injunction immediately mirrors actions in the other states where Kalshi has been involved in lawsuits: Nevada, New Jersey, Maryland, and Massachusetts.
So far, no state has actually successfully enforced a cease-and-desist order against Kalshi. Nevada is set to be the first state to successfully enforce one against a prediction market, as Crypto.com will take down its sports event contracts in the state next week after its request for an injunction was denied earlier this month. Kalshi won an injunction in the state in April.
Kalshi-Nevada discovery hearing pushed back
There was also an update in that Kalshi vs. Nevada case – which has moved on to determination on the merits after an injunction was granted and not appealed – Wednesday.
The court had been due to hold a hearing on whether to require Kalshi to produce evidence, including its communications with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. However, this hearing was pushed back “due to unforeseen circumstances.” It is now set to take place Nov. 18.
The court had ruled that some kind of evidence discovery was necessary in September, but Kalshi argued that documents the state had asked for went beyond what was relevant to the case.
