Home / Play / Washington judge grants state request for preliminary injunction against Kalshi

Washington judge grants state request for preliminary injunction against Kalshi

Legal Writer

Publish Date: Jul 21, 2026

Fact checked by: Matt Moreno

Key Points

Decision means Washingtonians could soon lose access to prediction market exchange
Kalshi has appeal options and status of case could affect other litigation
Court has yet to set exact terms of injunction

A state judge in Washington granted the state’s request for a preliminary injunction against Kalshi on Monday, potentially limiting access to Kalshi’s prediction market exchange for people in the state as the trial continues. King County Super Court Judge John McHale has not yet set the terms for the injunction, giving Kalshi and the state an Aug. 3, 2026, deadline to suggest the parameters.

This is a development that Kalshi sought to avoid not only directly in the King County Superior Court but in federal district and appellate courts as well. The terms of the forthcoming injunction as well as other developments across the United States may compel Kalshi to escalate those efforts.

gambling age in nj

Kalshi faces potential limits in Washington

With McHale’s July 20, 2026, order, Kalshi faces potentially having to limit the types of markets that Washingtonians can access on its platform or even completely block people in the state from trading prediction markets on its apps and website. McHale found that Washington showed that it is likely to succeed in its case against Kalshi and disagreed with Kalshi’s arguments that federal law preempts Washington’s attempts to regulate trading on its platform.

Washington Attorney General Nick Brown filed the lawsuit in late March, arguing that prediction market trading via Kalshi violated the state’s gambling laws and consumer protection statute. Kalshi shortly thereafter asked the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington to remove the case there, but its request was denied.

Kalshi appealed that ruling to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which rejected Kalshi’s request for a stay in May. That decision put Kalshi back in state court in Seattle, where Monday’s proceedings ensued.

McHale’s order did not specify which, if not all, of its prediction markets that Kalshi must stop offering to people in Washington or other barriers that Kalshi must put in place. Kalshi has a couple of weeks to suggest terms that it would tolerate.

Injunction terms to be set by Aug. 5

McHale stated in his Monday order that he would establish conditions for compliance with the injunction by Aug. 5, 2026, and gave both parties until Aug. 3 to collectively or individually suggest frameworks. Brown’s original complaint targeted most of the markets that Kalshi offers, so a negotiated submission that Kalshi and the state agree to seems unlikely.

The court is not obligated to accept any suggested terms that Kalshi or the state put forth, but it’s likely that they will receive serious consideration. Washington seems on track to become the fourth state in which Kalshi is facing temporary limitations, joining Massachusetts, Michigan, and Nevada.

In Michigan and Nevada, state courts have ordered Kalshi to effectively geofence those populations out of its addressable markets. The injunction in Massachusetts has been stayed pending appeal.

A similar geoblocking mandate until Washington’s case against Kalshi can be decided on its merits could be implemented soon. Kalshi still has legal remedies remaining, some of which involve Washington, D.C., instead of Washington state.

Kalshi’s path forward regarding its situation in Washington

Kalshi can appeal the injunctive relief order in Washington’s state court system after McHale sets the terms for the injunction. That seems a likely next step at this point, but the scope of possibilities is broader.

Kalshi still has the option to appeal the Ninth Circuit’s refusal to stay the case entirely to the U.S. Supreme Court. It has likely not done so in anticipation of the U.S. Supreme Court’s action on a related matter out of New Jersey.

Kalshi won a preliminary injunction against New Jersey state officials trying to enforce state gambling laws against itself in April, and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that ruling weeks later. That case is stayed pending New Jersey’s appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, for which it faces an Aug. 4 deadline to submit its petition.

If the Supreme Court takes up the appeal, that would put many of the same legal questions before the justices that Kalshi would raise in a potential appeal of the Ninth Circuit’s refusal to stay Washington’s lawsuit. If the U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear the case, though, that could leave the door open to Kalshi filing a petition of its own.

Kalshi has clearly stated that it wants to end state-level enforcement actions against trading on its platform, a goal that a favorable U.S. Supreme Court decision would accomplish. For the moment, though, it is facing that exact situation in Washington.

If you are looking for more news and updates head to our Ballislife Play page.

Play

Baltimore sues Kalshi and Polymarket over sports event contract offerings

The Baltimore City Council and Baltimore Mayor Brandon M. Scott have gone to court to try to stop Kalshi and Polymarket offering sports event contracts to people in the city. The lawsuit alleges that the two prediction market exchanges have deceived Baltimore residents by offering unlicensed sports wagering in violation ...

by Derek Helling

16 hours ago