CALinnovates
AdvocacyOppose
Litigation-outcome event contracts
Prediction Markets; Public Interest Determinations - Proposed Rules
CFTC-2026-1189-0001NPRM
Comments
1,385
Last activity Jul 29, 2026
Deadline
Closed on Jul 28, 2026
Closed Jul 28, 2026
Net supportiSupport minus oppose · campaigns included
-88%
-88% excluding campaigns
Document
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- Prediction Markets; Public Interest Determinations - Proposed Rules
- Posted
- Jun 12, 2026
- Comment period
- Jun 12, 2026 – Jul 28, 2026
- FR Doc
- 2026-11854
- CFR
- 17 CFR Part 40
Analysis
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Include campaigns
Analyzed 1,226 of 1,385 comments
89%· analysis in progress
Stance breakdown
-88%
Net support
Support70Oppose1,146Other10Not yet analyzed159
Aggregates include form-letter campaigns. Excluding them, net support is -88% across organic comments.
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Academic
11
Business
20
Individual
1,166
Government
11
Advocacy
15
Other
3
Not yet analyzed
159
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Posted Jun 12, 2026Deadline Jul 28, 2026
Jun 8Jun 22Jul 6Jul 20Jul 27
Support70Oppose1,146Other10
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Support
Oppose
Other
Individual
4%
96%
1%
Business
85%
15%
0%
Advocacy
20%
80%
0%
Academic
45%
45%
9%
Government
18%
73%
9%
Other
0%
33%
67%
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Insider information risk1,131
Sports wagering integrity and controls975
Online gambling regulation925
Limited government oversight500
Retail solicitation and consumer protection379
Resolvability and settlement integrity14
Litigation-outcome event contracts10
Ban betting on past events9
Privacy and constitutional rights3
Tribal gaming rights3
Position map
Who stands where on each issue?
Every non-silent position is backed by an excerpt from the comment.
Issues shown
Choose up to five.
| Organization | Sports wagering integrity and controls | Insider information risk | Litigation-outcome event contracts | Resolvability and settlement integrity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CALinnovates AdvocacyOppose CALinnovates opposes the proposed rules that would allow sports event contracts to be treated as ordinary financial deri | · | · | · | |
Gambit Gamer, Inc. BusinessSupport Joseph Sky Ryu, CEO of Gambit Gamer, Inc., supports the proposed framework for public-interest determinations regarding | · | · | · | |
Guidiville Indian Rancheria GovernmentOppose The Guidiville Indian Rancheria opposes the proposed rule, arguing it threatens tribal sovereignty, violates the Indian | · | · | · | |
Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board GovernmentOppose The Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board opposes the proposed rules, arguing that the CFTC's framework creates a federally | · | · | · | |
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF CHUMASH INDIANS GovernmentOppose The Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it would authorize online wagering on tri | · | · | · | |
Spirit Lake Gaming Commission GovernmentOppose The Spirit Lake Gaming Commission, a regulatory agency of the Spirit Lake Nation, opposes the CFTC's proposed rule, argu | · | · | · | |
THLOPTHLOCCO TRIBAL TOWN GovernmentSupport Mekko Brent Brown, Town King of the Thlopthlocco Tribal Town, submits comments on behalf of the federally recognized Ind | · | · | ||
Tonto Apache Tribe GovernmentOppose The Tonto Apache Tribe opposes the proposed rules because they could allow prediction-market contracts to function as sp | · | · | ||
Wanna.com / Wanna Parlay / Morris Packaging BusinessSupport Jim Bob Morris, founder of Wanna.com and Wanna Parlay, supports the proposed action to strictly enforce public interest | · | · | · |
Gambit Gamer, Inc.
BusinessSupport
Resolvability and settlement integrity
Guidiville Indian Rancheria
GovernmentOppose
Sports wagering integrity and controls
Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board
GovernmentOppose
Insider information risk
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF CHUMASH INDIANS
GovernmentOppose
Sports wagering integrity and controls
Spirit Lake Gaming Commission
GovernmentOppose
Sports wagering integrity and controls
THLOPTHLOCCO TRIBAL TOWN
GovernmentSupport
Sports wagering integrity and controls
Litigation-outcome event contracts
Tonto Apache Tribe
GovernmentOppose
Sports wagering integrity and controls
Insider information risk
Wanna.com / Wanna Parlay / Morris Packaging
BusinessSupport
Sports wagering integrity and controls
Comments
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
Filter:
- Jul 27, 2026George MartinezOpposeIndividual
An Arizona resident opposes the proposed rules, arguing that they create a regulatory gap that allows gambling and election-related wagers to bypass state and Tribal laws. The commenter contends that the proposal fails to provide adequate consumer protections, ignores retail harms, and improperly expands the CFTC's jurisdiction over gaming.
Read comment → - Jul 24, 2026Comment on CFTC-2026-1189, CFTC-2026-1189-0001, United South and Eastern Tribes Sovereignty Protection FundOpposeAdvocacy📎 Attachment
The United South and Eastern Tribes Sovereignty Protection Fund (USET SPF), a non-profit representing thirty-three federally recognized Tribal Nations, strongly opposes the proposed rule. They argue that the rule would allow the CFTC to potentially legalize sports betting and other gaming activities through prediction markets, which would infringe upon the exclusive sovereign rights and revenue streams of Tribal Nations under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA).
Read comment → - Jul 23, 2026Comment on CFTC-2026-1189, CFTC-2026-1189-0001, Stockbridge-Munsee CommunityOpposeGovernment📎 Attachment
The Stockbridge-Munsee Community, a federally recognized Indian Tribe, opposes the proposed rulemaking because it threatens tribal sovereignty, violates the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), and lacks proper government-to-government consultation. They argue that the CFTC lacks the jurisdiction to regulate gambling and that the proposal would allow unlicensed operators to siphon revenue away from regulated tribal and state markets.
Read comment →