Kalshi lost an attempt to override New York's state gambling laws yesterday, with a federal judge rejecting the prediction market operator's request to prevent enforcement of the rules.

Kalshi is appealing the decision to a higher court. This is one of numerous cases in which judges must decide whether state laws are preempted by federal regulation of prediction markets.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James issued a joint statement on the ruling today. “New York’s gambling laws are designed to protect consumers," they said. "Kalshi tried to ignore them. Yesterday, they lost in court. We will continue to hold all gambling platforms accountable to the law—and that includes prediction markets.”

Read full article

Comments

The Supreme Court yesterday decided not to intervene in challenges to a Texas app store law, allowing the state to enforce age-verification rules while a lawsuit continues.

A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Texas App Store Accountability Act in December 2025, finding that it likely violates the First Amendment. US District Judge Robert Pitman's ruling prevented Texas from enforcing the law when it was scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2026.

But the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit stayed the injunction on June 4, deciding that there is "no legitimate justification for enjoining enforcement of the entire Act." A lobby group representing Big Tech companies and an advocacy group for students then asked the Supreme Court to reinstate the injunction.

Read full article

Comments

The Federal Communications Commission will vote to eliminate a rule that requires Internet service providers to list all of their so-called "passthrough" fees on an easily accessible broadband price label. The FCC vote could also make the price labels themselves a bit harder for consumers to find.

ISPs routinely advertise prices much lower than those actually charged to consumers on their monthly bills. One method of raising monthly bill prices above advertised rates is to tack on fees that, ISPs claim, are used to offset charges imposed by local governments.

ISPs would be well within their rights to advertise accurate monthly prices and charge those exact prices on monthly bills. But because ISPs rarely do that, the FCC has required them to make specific price disclosures to consumers for the past decade.

Read full article

Comments