As of mid-January 2026, a legal and legislative storm is brewing in Albany that could redefine the future of information finance in the United States. New York, a state traditionally at the center of global finance, has become the primary battleground for a clash between state-level gambling regulators and the emerging asset class of prediction markets. Lawmakers are currently weighing aggressive new legislation that seeks to classify event contracts as unlicensed gambling, even as platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket argue they are essential financial tools for hedging risk and discovering truth.
The tension has reached a fever pitch following several "high-signal" events in early 2026, most notably a controversial "Maduro trade" on Polymarket where a single user reportedly turned $32,000 into $400,000 just hours before a U.S. military raid in Venezuela. This incident has catalyzed federal and state lawmakers to act, with New York residents now caught in the crosshairs of a jurisdictional tug-of-war. On decentralized platforms like Manifold, traders currently give an 81% probability to the theory that federal preemption will eventually shield these markets from state bans, yet the short-term outlook for New York-based traders remains fraught with legal uncertainty.
The Market: What's Being Predicted
The "market" currently under the most intense scrutiny isn't a single election or a sporting event, but the legal survival of the platforms themselves in New York. Two major pieces of legislation have defined the landscape in early 2026. The first, Assembly Bill A9251, known as the ORACLE Act (Oversight and Regulation of Activity for Contracts Linked to Events), was re-referred to the Assembly Committee on Consumer Affairs and Protection on January 7, 2026. Sponsored by Assemblymember Clyde Vanel, the bill is a scorched-earth proposal that would ban New Yorkers from trading on any contracts linked to political outcomes, catastrophic events, or the price of individual securities.
On the other side of the aisle, the New York Prediction Market Regulation Act (Senate Bill S8889), introduced by Senator Jeremy Cooney on January 13, 2026, offers a more moderate path. This bill would treat prediction markets as financial entities rather than gambling houses, requiring them to obtain a license from the Department of Financial Services (DFS). While the ORACLE Act threatens platforms with fines of up to $1 million per day for non-compliance, the Cooney bill seeks to integrate them into the state’s robust financial oversight system.
Currently, Kalshi is operating in New York under a "litigation stay" after receiving a cease-and-desist letter from the New York State Gaming Commission in late 2025. Kalshi’s legal team argues that because they are a designated contract market (DCM) regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), federal law preempts state gambling statutes. Polymarket, which recently signed a high-profile marketing partnership with the New York Rangers, owned by Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. (NYSE: MSGS), remains in a more precarious "invite-only" status for U.S. users as it navigates the final hurdles of domestic compliance.
Why Traders Are Betting
The surge in regulatory pressure has not dampened trading volume; if anything, it has highlighted the unique utility of these markets. The "Maduro trade" of early January became a lightning rod for the debate. Critics, including Representative Ritchie Torres (D-NY), point to the trade as evidence of potential "insider trading" by individuals with non-public information about government operations. However, proponents argue that the market correctly priced in the high probability of the event, providing a more accurate geopolitical forecast than traditional intelligence agencies or news outlets.
Traders are increasingly using these platforms not just for speculation, but as a hedge against real-world volatility. For instance, institutional traders are reportedly using Kalshi’s "recession" and "interest rate" markets to offset risks that traditional derivatives, often found on the Intercontinental Exchange (NYSE: ICE), may not cover as efficiently. The ability to "bet" on a catastrophe or a regulatory shift is, in financial terms, no different from buying an insurance policy or a credit default swap.
The primary factor driving the current 81% "preemption" odds on Manifold is the historical precedent of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA). Legal experts argue that if the federal government (via the CFTC) has authorized a market, a state cannot unilaterally ban it under the guise of "public morality." This has led to a "whale" strategy where large positions are being taken on the belief that Kalshi will win its lawsuit against the NY Gaming Commission, effectively opening the floodgates for fully regulated event trading across the country.
Broader Context and Implications
The fight in New York is the tip of the spear for a broader national conversation regarding the distinction between "financial trading" and "gambling." New York Attorney General Letitia James has been a vocal critic, maintaining that if a product "behaves like a bet," it should be subject to the state's strict gambling laws. This stance ignores the information-aggregation benefits that economists call the "wisdom of the crowd," which has consistently outperformed traditional polling and expert analysis in predicting everything from Fed rate hikes to the 2024 election results.
Enter Representative Ritchie Torres and the Public Integrity in Financial Prediction Markets Act of 2026, introduced on January 9. Unlike the NY State bills which target the platforms, the Torres bill targets the traders—specifically government insiders. By proposing a ban on federal officials trading on markets where they have "material nonpublic information," Torres is essentially treating prediction markets like the stock market. This is a significant move toward legitimization; it suggests that prediction markets are a permanent fixture of the financial landscape that simply requires the same ethical guardrails as Wall Street.
If New York successfully bans these markets, it could lead to a fragmented "digital wall" across the U.S., where prediction market access depends on one’s GPS coordinates. This "geofencing" reality is already a point of contention, as traders in New Jersey or Connecticut can access markets that their New York neighbors cannot. The historical accuracy of these markets suggests that such a ban would not only hurt traders but would deprive policymakers of a vital source of real-time data.
What to Watch Next
The coming weeks are critical for the New York market. On the legislative front, the ORACLE Act (A9251) currently lacks a Senate sponsor. If Senator Jeremy Cooney’s DFS-focused bill (S8889) gains traction instead, it would signal a victory for the "financial trading" camp and provide a roadmap for other states like California and Illinois to follow.
In the courts, all eyes are on the Southern District of New York, where a ruling on Kalshi’s motion for a preliminary injunction against the Gaming Commission is expected by late February. A win for Kalshi would effectively freeze the state's ability to enforce gambling-based crackdowns on federal-regulated exchanges. Conversely, a loss would likely embolden AG Letitia James to pursue broader enforcement actions against decentralized platforms like Polymarket.
Finally, keep a close watch on the progress of Representative Torres’ federal bill. While it seeks to limit who can trade, its passage would be a landmark moment for the industry, officially recognizing event contracts as a legitimate financial instrument under the umbrella of "public integrity."
Bottom Line
The regulatory struggle in New York is more than a legal dispute; it is an existential battle over the definition of risk. By attempting to shoehorn prediction markets into 20th-century gambling definitions, New York risk stifling a powerful 21st-century tool for price discovery and information clarity. The high probability assigned to "federal preemption" by the markets themselves suggests that traders believe the future of finance is too big for any single state to stop.
Ultimately, the "Maduro trade" and the resulting Torres bill highlight a shift in the narrative. The question is no longer if prediction markets should exist, but how to ensure they operate with integrity. As 2026 progresses, the outcome of the Empire State’s war on event contracts will likely determine whether prediction markets remain a niche hobby or become the bedrock of the global information economy.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or betting advice. Prediction market participation may be subject to legal restrictions in your jurisdiction.
PredictStreet focuses on covering the latest developments in prediction markets.
Visit the PredictStreet website at https://www.predictstreet.ai/.
