New York defies Trump admin, asks court to shut down Polymarket gambling

New York defies Trump admin, asks court to shut down Polymarket gambling

纽约州无视特朗普政府,请求法院关闭 Polymarket 赌博业务

New York sued Polymarket today, alleging that it runs an “illegal gambling operation” through its prediction market. 纽约州今日起诉 Polymarket,指控其通过预测市场运营“非法赌博业务”。

“By running an unlicensed gambling operation, Polymarket has done more than just knowingly violate state law, they have put New Yorkers at risk, especially those underage who are most vulnerable to problem gambling,” Governor Kathy Hochul said in a press release announcing the lawsuit. 州长凯西·霍楚尔(Kathy Hochul)在宣布诉讼的新闻稿中表示:“通过运营无证赌博业务,Polymarket 不仅仅是明知故犯地违反了州法律,他们还将纽约人置于风险之中,尤其是那些最容易受到赌博问题影响的未成年人。”

Polymarket is “sidestepping its obligation to pay taxes like licensed casinos and mobile sports gambling platforms do,” New York said. “This tax revenue from gambling regulation funds public schools, sports programs for underserved youth, and problem gambling education and treatment.” 纽约州表示,Polymarket 正在“规避其像持牌赌场和移动体育博彩平台那样纳税的义务。来自赌博监管的税收收入用于资助公立学校、为弱势青少年提供的体育项目,以及问题赌博的教育和治疗。”

Polymarket is “available to users between the ages of 18–20, even though New York law requires a person to be at least 21 years old to participate in mobile sports betting,” exposing young people to gambling’s “damaging effects on their mental and financial well-being,” New York said. 纽约州指出,Polymarket “向 18 至 20 岁的用户开放,尽管纽约法律要求参与移动体育博彩的人必须年满 21 岁”,这使年轻人暴露在赌博对其“心理和财务健康造成的破坏性影响”之下。

New York previously sued Kalshi, Polymarket’s chief rival. The Trump administration is on the side of the prediction markets, with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) asserting exclusive jurisdiction over the platforms. In August, the CFTC declared a “market emergency” in New York in an attempt to stop the state from applying its gambling laws to Kalshi. 纽约州此前曾起诉 Polymarket 的主要竞争对手 Kalshi。特朗普政府站在预测市场这一边,美国商品期货交易委员会(CFTC)声称对这些平台拥有专属管辖权。今年 8 月,CFTC 在纽约宣布进入“市场紧急状态”,试图阻止该州对 Kalshi 适用其赌博法律。

Gambling with a different name

换汤不换药的赌博

Polymarket and its rival Kalshi offer sports bets in the form of “event contracts” or “swaps,” which state governments and some courts say are just gambling with a different name. Polymarket 及其竞争对手 Kalshi 以“事件合约”或“掉期”的形式提供体育博彩,州政府和一些法院认为这只是换了个名字的赌博。

“Our gambling laws exist to protect New Yorkers, prevent the potential harms of problem gambling, and ensure funding for educational and public benefit programs,” New York Attorney General Letitia James said. “By skirting New York’s laws, Polymarket is targeting the most vulnerable and depriving New York families of critical services and support.” 纽约州总检察长莱蒂西亚·詹姆斯(Letitia James)表示:“我们的赌博法律旨在保护纽约人,防止问题赌博带来的潜在危害,并确保教育和公共福利项目的资金来源。通过规避纽约法律,Polymarket 将目标对准了最脆弱的群体,并剥夺了纽约家庭获得关键服务和支持的机会。”

The New York press release said the state government is “seeking a court order stopping Polymarket from operating as an unlicensed gambling business and requiring the company to pay fines, forfeit all illegal gains and pay restitution to users.” The lawsuit was filed today in a New York County court. 纽约州的新闻稿称,州政府正在“寻求法院下令,禁止 Polymarket 作为无证赌博企业运营,并要求该公司支付罚款、没收所有非法所得,并向用户支付赔偿金。”该诉讼已于今日在纽约县法院提起。

Polymarket’s main platform technically hasn’t been available in the US since 2022, when the CFTC ruled it was an illegally unregistered exchange. Polymarket’s website is restricted to view-only mode in the US, though users can get around that with a virtual private network. 从技术上讲,Polymarket 的主平台自 2022 年以来一直未在美国开放,当时 CFTC 裁定其为非法未注册交易所。Polymarket 的网站在美国被限制为仅查看模式,尽管用户可以通过虚拟专用网络(VPN)绕过此限制。

Polymarket promoted its platform in the US with a campaign that paid dozens of social media users to film themselves making fake bets on copies of the Polymarket website, The Wall Street Journal reported in June. 据《华尔街日报》6 月报道,Polymarket 曾在美国开展了一项营销活动,付费给数十名社交媒体用户,让他们拍摄自己在 Polymarket 网站的副本上进行虚假投注的视频,以此推广其平台。

Polymarket is seeking the CFTC’s permission to bring its main exchange back to the US, but it was able to launch a more limited, mobile-app version in December 2025 after acquiring QCX, a CFTC-licensed firm. The New York lawsuit was filed against QCX LLC, also known as Polymarket US. Polymarket 正在寻求 CFTC 的许可,以将其主交易所带回美国,但在收购了 CFTC 持牌公司 QCX 后,它已于 2025 年 12 月推出了一个功能更有限的移动应用程序版本。此次纽约州的诉讼对象正是 QCX LLC,即 Polymarket US。

NY alleges “flagrant disregard” of state law

纽约州指控其“公然无视”州法律

While Kentucky sued Polymarket in June, most of the court cases over state regulation of prediction markets have involved Kalshi. States including New York have sued Kalshi, and Kalshi sued other states after receiving cease-and-desist orders commanding it to stop offering gambling. 虽然肯塔基州在 6 月起诉了 Polymarket,但大多数关于州政府监管预测市场的法庭案件都涉及 Kalshi。包括纽约州在内的多个州起诉了 Kalshi,而 Kalshi 在收到要求其停止提供赌博服务的停止令后,也反过来起诉了其他州。

Polymarket “seeks to avoid the legal and financial consequences of New York’s close regulation of gambling by offering what is quintessentially wagering under the guise of ‘event contracts’ on a ‘prediction market,’” the New York lawsuit said. “Respondent accepts wagers from members of the public as a gambling business in New York in flagrant disregard of New York’s State Constitution, penal laws, and other statutes. Respondent is not licensed with the New York State Gaming Commission in any capacity.” 纽约州的诉讼称,Polymarket “试图通过在‘预测市场’上以‘事件合约’为幌子提供本质上的博彩服务,来规避纽约州严格的赌博监管所带来的法律和财务后果。被诉方作为一家赌博企业,在纽约州接受公众投注,公然无视纽约州宪法、刑法及其他法规。被诉方未获得纽约州博彩委员会的任何形式许可。”

The lawsuit against Polymarket closely mirrors the one that New York filed against Kalshi in July. Polymarket provided Ars with a statement today in response to what it called a “copy/paste” lawsuit: 针对 Polymarket 的诉讼与纽约州 7 月份对 Kalshi 提起的诉讼如出一辙。Polymarket 今日向 Ars 提供了一份声明,回应了其所谓的“复制粘贴”式诉讼:

“Polymarket was founded in a tiny NYC apartment and now has more than 350 employees here, embodying why people and businesses come here to make it. We believe in New York and we’re staying here. While the AG’s decision to copy/paste a recycled lawsuit is disappointing, we’ll fight for our users. We didn’t run to preemptively sue the state—we chose to engage with them directly on the substance and address their concerns. They preferred the media hit. Any time the AG’s office wants to swing by, our door is open for a conversation about how we protect consumers and offer fair, transparent, and legal markets.” “Polymarket 成立于纽约市的一间小公寓里,现在这里拥有 350 多名员工,这体现了为什么人们和企业来到这里寻求成功。我们相信纽约,我们也会留在这里。虽然总检察长决定‘复制粘贴’一份陈旧的诉讼令人失望,但我们将为我们的用户而战。我们没有仓促地先发制人起诉州政府——我们选择直接与他们就实质问题进行接触并解决他们的担忧。他们却更喜欢媒体炒作。任何时候,只要总检察长办公室愿意过来,我们的大门随时敞开,讨论我们如何保护消费者并提供公平、透明和合法的市场。”

Supreme Court may decide matter for all states

最高法院可能为所有州做出裁决

New York’s lawsuit said Polymarket’s offering meets the legal definition of gambling under state law. A person “engages in gambling when he stakes or risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that he will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome,” the state law says. 纽约州的诉讼称,Polymarket 的产品符合州法律对赌博的法律定义。州法律规定,一个人“当他以某种有价值的东西作为赌注或风险,押注于一个机会竞赛或不受其控制或影响的未来偶然事件的结果,并达成协议或谅解,即在出现特定结果时将获得有价值的东西时,即构成赌博。”

The lawsuit said examples of bets offered by Polymarket include whether the Green Bay Packers would win a football game against the New York Giants, who would win the Super Bowl in February 2026, and who would win college basketball games such as the March 20, 2026 contest between Hofstra University and the University of Alabama. 诉讼称,Polymarket 提供的投注示例包括:绿湾包装工队是否会赢得对阵纽约巨人队的橄榄球比赛、谁将赢得 2026 年 2 月的超级碗,以及谁将赢得大学篮球比赛(例如 2026 年 3 月 20 日霍夫斯特拉大学与阿拉巴马大学之间的比赛)。

The Supreme Court may ultimately decide whether states can restrict or prohibit sports gambling on prediction markets. While the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that New Jersey cannot regulate sports bets on prediction markets, the Ninth Circuit appeals court ruled that Nevada can stop Kalshi from allowing sports bets. The circuit courts disagree on whether a sports bet on a prediction market meets the federal definition. 最高法院最终可能决定各州是否有权限制或禁止预测市场上的体育博彩。虽然美国第三巡回上诉法院裁定新泽西州无权监管预测市场上的体育博彩,但第九巡回上诉法院却裁定内华达州可以阻止 Kalshi 提供体育博彩。各巡回法院在预测市场上的体育博彩是否符合联邦定义的问题上存在分歧。