A federal court in Las Vegas is now weighing whether Nevada’s most powerful casino lobby has standing to join a lawsuit against Kalshi, a federally approved prediction market that’s been operating in the state despite pushback from regulators.

Judge Andrew Gordon indicated Thursday that he intends to move fast on the question.

Kalshi, based in New York and regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, filed the suit in March after the Nevada Gaming Control Board ordered it to shut down. Regulators argue that the platform’s markets look too much like sports betting.

Kalshi disagrees, pointing to its federal oversight and the legal distinction between event contracts and traditional wagers.

But that distinction rarely matters to the average user. Most are responding to format, not regulation–whether it looks like a bet or feels like a prize draw, the focus is on the payout.

Platforms built on a Real Raffle model have followed the same logic, offering low entry costs, an explosion of excitement, and clear reward structures without falling under traditional betting laws. The setup is designed for accessibility and everyday use, making it an appealing option for users drawn to fast-result games.

For regulators, though, it is not just about form but jurisdiction–and that’s where the Kalshi case has forced a deeper look.

Gordon has already paused state enforcement with a temporary restraining order issued earlier this month. He’s now considering whether to allow the Nevada Resort Association–a trade group representing 70 casinos statewide–to formally intervene. The legal briefs are on a tight schedule, with Kalshi’s response due this week and the NRA’s reply expected by May 28.

The NRA claims Kalshi’s presence could undercut Nevada’s regulated gambling industry, which handled $7.8 billion in sports bets last year. In its court filing, the group argued that Kalshi’s contracts offer the same payout structure as licensed sportsbooks, but without any contribution to state tax revenue.

There’s also concern from the state about Kalshi offering political prediction markets. Nevada law prohibits betting on elections, but Kalshi has listed contracts tied to vote outcomes. The NRA pointed to social media posts where Kalshi used sports betting language in its promotion, calling itself the first legal nationwide betting platform.

Kalshi argues that it operates under federal jurisdiction and has the right to offer markets in states where local gambling laws would normally prevent it. So far, that position has held up in court. Cease-and-desist orders from New Jersey and Maryland were also blocked.

Beyond the regulatory fight, critics have raised questions about Kalshi’s ability to handle responsible gambling standards. The NRA noted that Kalshi lacks industry-level safeguards against underage gambling or compulsive behavior–standards that Nevada sportsbooks are required to meet.

Still, not all experts are convinced Kalshi poses a threat. Gaming law analyst I. Nelson Rose said event-based markets have shown promise in producing highly accurate forecasts. But even he acknowledged that the Kalshi case has political dimensions.

In early January, Donald Trump Jr. announced that he had taken a paid advisory role with Kalshi following his father’s re-election campaign. Around the same time, Brian Quintenz–a former Kalshi board member–was named head of the CFTC. Eliezer Mishory, once Kalshi’s top attorney, also left the company to take a federal policy role.

The next court moves will likely determine not just Kalshi’s future in Nevada, but also how much authority federal platforms can exercise when state gambling laws push back.