Coinbase is taking three US states to court in a bid to lock in federal protection for its planned prediction markets, opening a new front in the battle over whether event contracts are finance or gambling.
The exchange has sued regulators in Connecticut, Illinois, and Michigan, asking federal judges to declare that prediction markets listed on a US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)-regulated platform fall under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction, not 50 separate state gambling codes.
In a Friday X post, chief legal officer Paul Grewal said Coinbase filed the cases “to confirm what is clear: prediction markets fall squarely under the jurisdiction of the @CFTC, not any individual state gaming regulator (let alone 50).”
Coinbase’s federalism challenge to state gambling laws
Coinbase frames the dispute as both a legal and structural question. Court filings argue that if each state can independently decide whether federally supervised prediction markets are illegal gambling, the most restrictive regime would effectively become the national standard, “turning our system of federalism upside down.”
The company also leans hard on the way Congress defined “commodity” in the CEA, noting that lawmakers chose to carve out only a handful of specific underliers, notably onions and “motion‑picture box‑office receipts,” rather than sports or politics.
Coinbase filing against Michigan. Source: Court Listener
Grewal draws a clear line between Coinbase’s planned markets and traditional sportsbooks. Casinos and bookmakers, he argues, profit from customer losses and set odds to maximize their winnings. Prediction markets, on the other hand, are neutral matching engines that pair buyers and sellers and are indifferent to price.
Treating both as the same thing, Coinbase says, would not only misread the statute but also smother a federally regulated product that is supposed to live inside the derivatives framework, with CFTC surveillance and position limits.
Kalshi’s mixed record shows what’s at stake for prediction markets
Kalshi, which already operates as a CFTC‑designated contract market for event contracts, has been testing that theory in court for almost a year. It has sued or been sued in at least six states over whether its sports and event markets are CFTC‑regulated derivatives or unlicensed gambling.
Outcomes so far are mixed. In Nevada and Maryland, judges have held that Kalshi is subject to state gaming oversight despite its CFTC status, while in New Jersey and, more recently, Connecticut, federal courts have granted the company temporary protection from enforcement while they weigh broader injunctions. Massachusetts, meanwhile, has sued to block Kalshi’s sports products, with an injunction decision not expected until early 2026.
With Coinbase now effectively adopting Kalshi’s pre‑emption playbook, the combined docket could force federal courts to answer the core question both firms have been circling. Are US prediction markets going to be treated as regulated financial instruments under the CEA, or as gambling products that live or die under state law?
The elections watchdog has criticised the government for offering to consider delaying 63 local council elections next year – as five authorities confirmed to Sky News that they would ask for a postponement.
On Thursday, hours before parliament began its Christmas recess, the government revealed that councils were being sent a letter asking if they thought elections should be delayed in their areas due to challenges around delivering local government reorganisation plans.
The chief executive of the Electoral Commission, Vijay Rangarajan, hit out at the announcement on Friday, saying he was “concerned” that some elections could be postponed, with some having already been deferred from 2025.
“We are disappointed by both the timing and substance of the statement. Scheduled elections should, as a rule, go ahead as planned, and only be postponed in exceptional circumstances,” he said in a statement.
“Decisions on any postponements will not be taken until mid-January, less than three months before the scheduled May 2026 elections are due to begin.
“This uncertainty is unprecedented and will not help campaigners and administrators who need time to prepare for their important roles.”
Mr Rangarajan added: “We very much recognise the pressures on local government, but these late changes do not help administrators. Parties and candidates have already been preparing for some time, and will be understandably concerned.”
He said “capacity constraints” were not a “legitimate reason for delaying long planned elections”, which risked “affecting the legitimacy of local decision-making and damaging public confidence”.
The watchdog chief also said there was “a clear conflict of interest in asking existing councils to decide how long it will be before they are answerable to voters”.
Four mayoral elections due to take place in May 2026 set to be postponed
Sky News contacted the 63 councils that have been sent the letter about potentially delaying their elections.
At the time of publication, 17 authorities had replied with their decisions, while 33 said they would make up their minds before the government’s deadline of 15 January.
Many councils told Sky News they were surprised at yesterday’s announcement, saying that they had been fully intending to hold their polls as scheduled.
They said they were now working to understand the appropriate democratic mechanism for deciding whether to request a postponement of elections. Some local authorities believe it should be a decision made by their full council, while others will leave it up to council leaders or cabinet members to decide.
Multiple councils also emphasised in statements to Sky News that the ultimate decision to delay elections lay with the government.
X
This content is provided by X, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable X cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
Reform UK has threatened legal action against ministers, accusing Labour and the Tories of “colluding” to postpone elections in order to lock other parties out of power – a sentiment echoed by Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey.
But shadow local government secretary Sir James Cleverly told Sky News this morning that the Conservative Party “wants these elections to go ahead”. Sky News understands that the national party is making that position clear to local leaders.
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government, said it was taking a “locally-led approach”, and emphasised that “councils are in the best position to judge the impact of postponements on their area”.
They added: “These are exceptional circumstances where councils have told us they’re struggling to prepare for resource-intensive elections to councils that will shortly be abolished, while also reorganising into more efficient authorities that can better serve local residents.
“There is a clear precedent for postponing local elections where local government reorganisation is in progress, as happened in 2019 and 2022.”
The five councils that confirmed they would be seeking postponements were:
Blackburn with Darwen Council (Labour);
Chorley Borough Council (Labour);
East Sussex County Council (Conservative minority);
Hastings Borough Council (Green minority);
West Sussex County Council (Conservative).
The councils in Chorley, and East and West Sussex, had decided prior to Thursday’s government announcement that they would request a delay.
Can the Conservatives make ground at the local elections in 2026?
An East Sussex County Council spokesperson told Sky News: “It is welcome that the government is listening to local leaders and has heard the case for focussing our resources on delivery in East Sussex, particularly with devolution and reorganisation of local government, as well as delivering services to residents, such high priorities.”
They also pointed to the cost of electing councillors for a term of just one year, and argued that it would be “more prudent for just one set of elections to be held in 2027”.
West Sussex County Council echoed those reasons and said it would cost taxpayers across the county £9m to hold elections in 2026, 2027, and 2028, as currently planned.
Chorley and Blackburn councils also cited the cost of delivering elections, and said they would prefer that money be spent on delivering the local government reorganisation and delivering services to local residents.
Meanwhile, 12 councils confirmed to Sky News that they would not be requesting delays:
Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council (Liberal Democrat-Independents);
Broxbourne Borough Council (Conservative);
Colchester City Council (Labour-Liberal Democrat);
Eastleigh Borough Council (Liberal Democrat);
Essex County Council (Conservative);
Hart District Council (Liberal Democrat-Community Campaign);
Hastings Borough Council (Green minority);
Isle of Wight Council (no overall control);
Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council (Conservative);
Portsmouth City Council (Liberal Democrat minority);
Keonne Rodriguez, who pleaded guilty to one felony count related to his role at Samourai Wallet, is calling on US President Donald Trump to pardon him, citing similar language that has been successful in previous pardon applications.
In a Thursday X post, Rodriguez said he would report to prison on Friday, where he will serve a five-year sentence for operating an illegal money transmitter. The Samourai co-founder claimed there were no “victims” to his crime, and blamed his incarceration on “lawfare perpetrated by a weaponized Biden DOJ.”
In a message tagging Trump, Rodriguez expressed hope that the US president would issue a federal pardon for him and William “Bill” Lonergan Hill, another Samourai executive who pleaded guilty and was sentenced to four years. Rodriguez blamed “activist judges” for his legal troubles, claiming he was targeted by a “political anti-innovation agenda.”
“I maintain hope that [Trump] is a fair man, a man of the people, who will see this prosecution for what it was: an anti innovation, anti american, attack on the rights and liberties of free people,” said Rodriguez. “I believe his team […] and others truly want to end the weaponization of the DOJ that the previous administration wielded so effectively […] I believe he will continue to wield that power for good and pardon me and Bill.”
Rodriguez’s public plea followed Trump’s statement that he would “take a look” at a pardon for the Samourai co-founder, claiming that he had no knowledge of the case. It’s unclear whether Rodriguez filed an official application for a pardon or is relying on public statements to get the president’s attention.
Other crypto execs successfully lobbied for a Trump pardon
One of Trump’s first acts as president in January was to issue a pardon for Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht, who had been serving a life sentence for his role in creating and operating the darknet marketplace.
Former Binance CEO Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, who pleaded guilty to one felony in 2023 related to the exchange’s Anti-Money Laundering program, served four months in prison but also received a pardon from the president. Trump later said he “[knew] nothing about” Zhao when asked about the pardon in a November interview.
Rodriguez’s language addressing Trump mirrored comments from the White House on previous pardons. For example, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said it was a “weaponization of justice from the previous administration” when the president commuted the sentence of David Gentile, who was convicted of defrauding “thousands of individual investors in a $1.6 billion” scheme in 2024.
Crypto users on Polymarket were not given the choice of betting on the odds of a Trump pardon of Rodriguez as of Friday. At the time of publication, Trump ally Steve Bannon had the highest odds, at 9%.
The United Kingdom is taking a decisive step toward fully regulating its crypto market. This week, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) launched a wide-ranging consultation outlining proposed rules for crypto exchanges, staking services, lending platforms and decentralized finance.
The proposals follow new secondary legislation from the UK Treasury that formally brings crypto activities into the country’s financial services framework, with a target implementation date of Oct. 25, 2027.
In this week’s episode of Byte-Sized Insight, Cointelegraph explored what this consultation signals for the UK crypto market and how industry leaders are interpreting the regulator’s direction. We spoke with Perry Scott, head of UK policy at Kraken and chair of the UK Cryptoasset Business Council, to break down what’s new and what’s at stake.
From fragmented oversight to full market structure
Until now, the UK’s approach to crypto regulation has been piecemeal. Companies have operated under anti-money laundering rules and strict financial promotion requirements, but there has been no unified framework governing how crypto markets should function.
Scott described the moment as long anticipated.
“Christmas has come early for policy nerds like me,” he said, pointing to the scale of the proposals, which span “around 700 pages to sink our teeth into.”
More importantly, the consultation comes with a firm timeline. “Mark your calendars because the firing gun has been fired,” Scott said, referring to the 2027 go-live date, which gives a signal that the industry is moving from waiting to preparing.
At the core of the consultation is market structure, particularly how exchanges are regulated and how they access liquidity. Scott welcomed the FCA’s recognition that crypto markets are inherently global, saying that “accessing global liquidity will support better execution outcomes for consumers.”
The UK is also carving out a distinct approach to staking. Earlier this year, it became one of the first major jurisdictions to separate staking from traditional financial services rules. Under the consultation, staking would be governed by bespoke requirements, a move Scott called “world leading.”
The consultation is open until Feb. 12, and companies are already adjusting.
“UK firms aren’t going to sit around and wait,” Scott said.
He said regulatory certainty could create “hundreds, if not thousands of jobs” across compliance, legal and technical roles.
As the UK positions itself between the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) regime and renewed regulatory momentum in the US, the outcome of this process could determine whether it emerges as a competitive crypto hub or struggles to keep pace.
To hear the complete conversation on Byte-Sized Insight, listen to the full episode on Cointelegraph’s Podcasts page, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And remember to check out Cointelegraph’s full lineup of other shows!