Nevada Issues Preliminary Injunction Against Polymarket

Nevada’s First Judicial District Court has granted the Nevada Gaming Control Board a preliminary injunction against Polymarket, completing the state’s enforcement action against every major prediction market operator known to be running without a Nevada gaming licence.

Judge Woodbury Grants the Motion

Judge Jason Woodbury of the First Judicial District Court in Carson City granted the NGCB’s motion for a preliminary injunction against QCX LLC, doing business as Polymarket US, on May 29. The board announced the ruling on June 2.

The injunction blocks Polymarket from offering event contracts in Nevada while the underlying civil enforcement action continues. The NGCB filed that action in January 2026, alleging Polymarket was conducting unlicensed wagering in violation of Nevada law, specifically NRS 463.160, NRS 463.350, NRS 465.086, and NRS 465.092.

The court applied the same standard established earlier this year in the Kalshi matter: that permitting an unlicensed operator to offer event contracts causes irreparable harm to the state’s ability to maintain its comprehensive regulatory structure. That framing keeps the state’s injury argument grounded in regulatory function rather than commercial competition with licensed sportsbook operators.

NGCB Chairman Mike Dreitzer responded to the ruling in a statement:

“We are very pleased with Judge Woodbury’s ruling and will continue to vigorously enforce Nevada law to safeguard gaming in our state.”

Dreitzer separately called on the wider gambling industry to take a firmer stance against prediction market expansion, speaking at the International Conference on Gambling and Risk Taking at the Bellagio in Las Vegas. He argued that the licensed gaming industry must defend the regulatory standards developed to protect consumers and generate public revenues.

Nevada Completes Its Enforcement Sweep

The Polymarket injunction is the culmination of an enforcement campaign the NGCB launched in March 2025 with a cease-and-desist against Kalshi. Since then, the board has filed civil enforcement actions against five platforms and secured court-ordered preliminary injunctions against three.

Kalshi is barred from offering contracts involving sports, elections, and entertainment events in Nevada under a prior preliminary injunction. Coinbase faces the same restriction, following the NGCB’s civil action against Coinbase over unlicensed event contracts. Robinhood agreed voluntarily to pause Nevada operations pending litigation. Crypto.com withdrew from Nevada after a separate injunction motion against it was denied.

With the Polymarket ruling, the NGCB confirmed it has restricted all unlicensed prediction market platforms known to be operating in the state.

The State Court Strategy

The NGCB’s decision to pursue enforcement through state court has been central to its results. Prediction market platforms have argued consistently that oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) pre-empts state gambling law. That argument has performed better in federal court than in state court.

Kalshi initially won a federal preliminary injunction against the NGCB, with a federal judge accepting the pre-emption case at the interim stage. That ruling was later dissolved. The NGCB then moved to state court, where it has since secured preliminary injunctions against Kalshi, Coinbase, and now Polymarket. The federal pre-emption argument carries far less weight in state court proceedings.

Nevada’s state court approach is now being studied by regulators in other jurisdictions. Massachusetts, Illinois, and Arizona are each engaged in their own legal battles with prediction market platforms. Several additional states have issued cease-and-desist letters without proceeding to litigation. The broader US gambling legislation picture in 2026 reflects a divide between states moving aggressively against unlicensed prediction market operators and those still working through the regulatory classification question.

What Comes Next

Polymarket has grounds to appeal Judge Woodbury’s preliminary injunction order, and the civil enforcement case will continue in Nevada state court. The broader federal question is now before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which is considering Nevada’s appeal in the Kalshi matter. During oral arguments in April, a three-judge panel was reported to be leaning toward Nevada.

A ruling in Nevada’s favour at the Ninth Circuit would create a circuit split with the Third Circuit’s decision in KalshiEx v. Flaherty, which found in favour of federal pre-emption. A split of that kind would significantly increase the likelihood of Supreme Court review and a definitive ruling on whether CFTC oversight shields prediction market platforms from state gaming law.

The Nevada court restraining order against Polymarket issued in February was the interim step that preceded Friday’s preliminary injunction. Judge Woodbury made clear at that stage that Nevada was “reasonably likely to prevail on the merits.” That finding has now been confirmed at the next stage of the proceedings.

The Ninth Circuit timeline is the most consequential variable remaining. Its ruling will determine whether the state court enforcement model holds nationally or whether federal pre-emption reasserts itself across multiple jurisdictions.

Source: Nevada Gaming Control Board