A Nevada state court declined a request from the Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB) to immediately block Coinbase’s prediction markets, preserving access to the product while the broader legal challenge plays out. The NGCB had filed a civil enforcement action alleging that Coinbase is offering unlicensed gambling products to Nevada residents through prediction market contracts including sports and event-linked outcomes — without a state gaming licence. The ruling means the exchange can continue to offer these markets in the short term as the dispute moves toward a full hearing scheduled in the coming days.

The NGCB claims that the event-based contracts on Coinbase, which allow speculation on outcomes like sporting results or real-world events, effectively amount to unlicensed wagering under state law and threaten the integrity of Nevada’s tightly regulated gaming industry. Regulators had asked the court for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and a preliminary injunction to force an immediate shutdown of the prediction markets for Nevada users. However, the court rejected the emergency bid, finding regulators had not demonstrated “immediate and irreparable harm.” Coinbase’s legal team argues that the products are regulated at the federal level under the Commodity Exchange Act, and that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) holds exclusive jurisdiction over these contracts, pre-empting state gambling laws.

Coinbase’s prediction market offering was launched recently across all 50 U.S. states in partnership with Kalshi, a CFTC-regulated designated contract market. Through this collaboration, users can trade contracts on outcomes tied to various events using regulated infrastructure, a product model designed to sit within existing derivatives law. Despite federal oversight of Kalshi, Nevada regulators maintain that the underlying contracts should comply with state gaming statutes because they resemble traditional sports betting. This conflict reflects a broader regulatory tension in the U.S. between state gaming authorities and federal derivatives regulators over how to classify and oversee emerging crypto-enabled financial products.

The court’s decision to reject the immediate ban does not resolve the substantive legal questions at issue but indicates that judges will take more time to consider the arguments before determining whether Coinbase must cease operations within the state. Meanwhile, similar legal and regulatory pressure is mounting nationwide as other states including Illinois, Michigan, and Connecticut also challenge prediction market products on jurisdictional grounds. Coinbase has responded by filing its own federal suits, asserting that allowing states to regulate these contracts independently would undermine national market consistency and stifle innovation.

For market observers and investors, the Nevada case highlights the regulatory uncertainty surrounding prediction markets as traditional financial and gaming statutes collide with crypto-centric products. The temporary win for Coinbase may offer short-term relief, but the broader outcome could influence how digital prediction contracts are classified and regulated across the United States. This has implications for compliance costs, product availability, and where institutional and retail participants can legally engage in these markets. Sentiment among industry participants appears cautious, reflecting concern about legal risks and the potential for fragmented state approaches that could limit national product rollouts.