# Robinhood Derivatives v. Dreitzer ***Robinhood Derivatives, LLC v. Mike Dreitzer, Chairman, Nevada Gaming Control Board*, No. 26-338**, is [[Robinhood]]'s petition asking the Supreme Court to overturn the Ninth Circuit's August 2026 ruling that Nevada may apply its gambling laws to sports event contracts. It is one of three petitions on the same question now before the Court, alongside New Jersey's in [[KalshiEX v. Flaherty]] and Crypto.com's in [[North American Derivatives Exchange v. Nevada]]. ## The question The petition asks "whether the Commodity Exchange Act preempts the application of state gaming laws to sports-related event contracts traded on federally regulated contract markets." ## How it got here - **The product.** Robinhood Derivatives, a subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, is a CFTC-registered futures commission merchant: a broker, not an exchange. It opened a prediction-markets hub in March 2025. Customer orders were executed on Kalshi's exchange and later on others. - **Nevada.** Nevada regulators sent Robinhood a cease-and-desist in March 2025. Robinhood sued for a preliminary injunction and lost in federal district court in November 2025. - **The Ninth Circuit, August 28, 2026.** In the lead case, *KalshiEX, LLC v. Assad* (No. 25-7516), Judge Ryan D. Nelson wrote that sports event contracts are not "swaps" under the Commodity Exchange Act, so the Act's exclusive-jurisdiction clause does not reach them. The court also rejected field and conflict preemption. It affirmed the denial of Robinhood's injunction (No. 25-7831) in a companion order that adopted the same reasoning. - **The split.** The petition calls the circuits split 1–1: the Third Circuit sided with Kalshi against New Jersey in April 2026, and the Ninth Circuit expressly disagreed. It treats the Sixth Circuit's April 2026 Ohio ruling as a preliminary stay decision that leaned toward the state. ## Docket (as of October 10, 2026) | Date | Entry | |---|---| | Sept 10, 2026 | Petition filed; response due October 14 | | Sept 14, 2026 | Docketed as **No. 26-338** | | Oct 8–9, 2026 | Nevada asks for more time; granted. Response now due **November 13, 2026** | **Counsel.** Lisa S. Blatt of Williams & Connolly for Robinhood; Heidi Parry Stern of the Nevada Attorney General's office ([[Aaron Ford]]) for the state. None of the prediction-market petitions was on the Court's first order list of the October 2026 term. ## Why it matters - **The broker's angle.** Robinhood is not an exchange; it sells contracts that other exchanges list. If states can regulate the contracts, they can reach every brokerage and app that offers them, not just the exchanges. - **Stakes in the petition's own numbers.** Over $25 billion traded on CFTC-registered prediction markets in 2025. More than 20 states have started or threatened enforcement, market participants have filed more than 30 suits, and the [[CFTC]] has sued nine states (see [[CFTC v. Arizona]]). - **Three petitions, one question.** The filings add pressure on the Court to take the issue, and they give it a choice of vehicle. All three came up on preliminary injunctions, not final judgments. ## See also - [[KalshiEX v. Flaherty]] · [[North American Derivatives Exchange v. Nevada]] · [[CFTC v. Arizona]] - [[Robinhood]] · [[Kalshi]] · [[Crypto.com]] · [[CFTC]] - [[Federal Preemption]] · [[Sports Betting]] · [[Prediction Markets]] · [[Legal Cases Hub]]