Robinhood halts new sports contracts in Ohio after agreement with commission by Nov. 2
Key Facts
Robinhood stopped offering new sports event contracts in Ohio after its subsidiary, Robinhood Derivatives, reached an agreement with the state’s Casino Control Commission. According to Robinhood’s filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the company agreed on Oct. 26 to halt new offerings by Nov. 2. The agreement followed the commission’s demand that the company stop offering sports contracts in the state. In return, the commission agreed to refrain from enforcing state gaming laws while related appeals are considered. That means the platform has suspended new contracts in Ohio, while the dispute over which authority has legal jurisdiction remains unresolved.
The commission said Robinhood and three other operators no longer offer new sports event contracts in the state, according to CDC Gaming, citing Legal Sports Report. The entities named included MooMoo Financial and Gemini, alongside Robinhood. That brought to five the number of entities that have complied with the commission’s cease-and-desist orders. Plus500US complied on Oct. 21, according to the same report. The developments show that enforcement of the orders is unfolding in stages among the markets and brokers that received demands from the commission.
The commission began sending cease-and-desist orders to markets and brokers on Oct. 2, when it directed them to 10 entities, according to CDC Gaming, citing Legal Sports Report. That same day, Robinhood said its subsidiary had received a letter demanding that it stop offering sports event contracts in Ohio. The company later reached an agreement setting a deadline for halting new contracts, with the commitment to refrain from enforcement tied to the ongoing consideration of appeals. The commission’s arrangement covers appeals by Robinhood and other prediction market operators before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court. The agreement does not resolve, according to the company’s filing, whether the contracts are subject to the state’s gaming laws.
The move comes amid a broader legal dispute over the classification of sports contracts and the limits of state authority. In September, the Sixth Circuit upheld the denial of Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction in Ohio, according to Robinhood’s filing, after which Kalshi sought a rehearing before the full court. In its opinion in the case, the court concluded that Kalshi’s sports contracts do not meet the definition of a “swap” under the Commodity Exchange Act. It added that even if those contracts were considered swaps, federal law does not bar Ohio or Tennessee from enforcing their gambling laws. The ruling provides a direct legal backdrop to Robinhood’s agreement, but does not resolve the other appeals covered by the commitment to refrain from enforcement.
The dispute concerns activity that Robinhood said drove growth in event contract revenue in the third quarter and the first nine months of 2026, compared with the same periods in 2025. The company attributed the increase to growth in the prediction markets sector and accelerating activity in its business in the field, reflecting higher trading, particularly in sports-related contracts. It said the product was still at an early stage during the comparison periods in 2025. The disclosure provides business context for the importance of sports contracts to the company’s activity, without Robinhood directly linking revenue growth to the Ohio agreement. The filing does not include a specific revenue figure for these periods in the information presented here.
At the federal regulatory level, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission published a proposal on Oct. 9 to clarify that the definition of a “swap” includes event contracts, including those linked to sports, politics, culture and weather. Commission Chairman Michael Selig said Americans use these contracts to hedge risks, speculate and provide the public with information about the outcomes of future events, and said they are commodity derivatives within the commission’s jurisdiction. The commission requested written comments within 30 days of the proposal’s publication in the Federal Register. The proposed rulemaking makes the scope of federal jurisdiction one of the next developments relevant to the dispute between platforms and regulators in the United States.
In Ohio, the commission continues discussions with the three remaining companies, according to CDC Gaming, citing Legal Sports Report. At the same time, Polymarket and Underdog are suing the commission, keeping legal challenges active alongside some operators’ compliance. Coinbase agreed to stop offering the contracts starting Nov. 13, a later date than the deadline Robinhood accepted. Compliance timelines therefore vary among companies, while negotiations with the remaining entities continue. In 2025, the commission took cease-and-desist action against Kalshi, Robinhood and Crypto.com for offering sports contracts to Ohio residents without a sports gaming license, according to its official meeting minutes.