Crypto.com and prediction market operator Novig have filed separate federal lawsuits against Missouri officials, seeking to block the state from enforcing its gambling laws against their sports event contracts.

Both suits were filed on 16 October, after the 30-day deadline set in cease-and-desist letters from Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway had run out. The letters, sent last month to six platforms, gave each operator 30 days to stop offering sports contracts to Missouri residents or obtain a licence from the Missouri Gaming Commission and pay the state’s 10% sports wagering tax.

The claims

Both companies argue that their sports event contracts are swaps traded on federally regulated exchanges and fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, so state gambling law is pre-empted. Crypto.com’s exchange is seeking a declaratory judgment and a permanent injunction against enforcement. Novig is seeking a preliminary injunction, according to reports of the filings.

Crypto.com also argued that the attorney general’s letter was sent to the wrong company, and that the licensing route offered in the letters was not realistic because Missouri has no sports wagering licences left to issue.

Hanaway had anticipated a fight when the letters went out. “Chances are they may sue us once they get this cease-and-desist letter,” she said at the time. Her office has argued that federal law does not pre-empt state law in this area and that sports event contracts do not qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act.

Others hold off

The other four recipients of the Missouri letters, Kalshi, Polymarket, Robinhood and Underdog, had not filed suit as of the weekend. Underdog is already in court in Tennessee, where it is seeking an injunction to stop the state’s crackdown on its event contracts and a threat to its fantasy sports licence.

Both Crypto.com and Novig have sued other states over similar enforcement action, part of a wave of litigation that has produced conflicting rulings in federal courts. That split is now before the US Supreme Court in the form of New Jersey’s petition over Kalshi, which 39 states have urged the court to hear. The NFL has separately asked the court to let states regulate sports prediction markets.

Federal rules in motion

The Missouri cases also land as the CFTC moves to set its own rules. The commission has proposed defining event contracts as swaps while carving out traditional sportsbooks, an approach state regulators including Nevada’s have attacked as an artificial distinction between products that are economically the same as a sports bet.

Missouri’s legal sports betting market opened in December 2025 after voters approved a constitutional amendment, and the state’s licensed sportsbooks pay tax on revenue that prediction markets do not. Ohio has sent its own cease-and-desist letters to ten prediction markets, and more states are expected to follow.

The federal court in Missouri will first have to decide whether to grant interim relief to the two operators. Whatever it decides is likely to be appealed, adding Missouri to the list of states whose fight with prediction markets is heading for the federal appeals courts.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority has published its first guidance on incoming rules that will stop wagering operators using athletes, celebrities and social media influencers in their advertising, setting out who is in scope and confirming exceptions for dedicated racing services.

The guidance, released on Monday, covers the notable persons provision in Australia’s new gambling advertising legislation. From 1 January 2027, wagering advertising content should not feature “a notable person”, and licensed interactive wagering service providers will be barred from entering contracts or arrangements for the sponsorship, participation or involvement of a notable person in promoting wagering advertising in Australia.

Who counts as notable

The law defines a notable person broadly. It covers current or former professional sports players and athletes, celebrities, social media influencers and “prominent individuals”, as well as anyone in a class of persons determined by the Minister for Communications. Communications Minister Anika Wells has said the broad definitions were chosen to reflect how celebrity is changing, with online creators now as influential as traditional stars.

The ACMA guidance gives examples of individuals likely to be in and out of scope, lists the factors the regulator may consider when assessing an alleged contravention, and explains how the ban operates, including the provision covering anyone who causes or authorises a gambling advertisement. The penalty under the regime falls on the wagering provider rather than the notable person.

Racing carve-out

The guidance confirms exceptions for dedicated racing services, channels and programmes. Advertising that relates solely or principally to racing and is shown only on racing-dedicated programmes, channels or online services will fall outside the ban. That matters for broadcasters such as Sky Racing and Racing.com, where jockeys, trainers and well-known racing presenters are part of the furniture.

Australian racing outlet The Straight reported that questions remain over how far the carve-out extends, including how mixed programming and racing personalities who appear across mainstream sport will be treated. The ACMA said it may issue further formal guidance on the notable persons provision if needed.

Part of a wider package

The notable persons ban is one strand of the federal government’s response to the 2023 Murphy inquiry into online gambling harm, which recommended a phased ban on gambling advertising. The government’s package stops short of a full ban but adds limits on the number of betting ads on television, blackout periods around live sport and opt-out mechanisms online.

The ACMA named implementation of the gambling advertising reforms as one of its compliance and enforcement priorities for 2026-27 and said it would issue guidance to broadcasters, advertisers and online content providers. It has already been active on gambling ads, finding SBS in breach of rules during its Tour de France coverage and warning an influencer over the promotion of illegal offshore gambling.

For operators such as Sportsbet, TAB, Ladbrokes and bet365, the change means unwinding ambassador deals with sports stars and media personalities before the end of the year. The guidance also has implications for affiliate and influencer marketing, where content creators have become a growing channel for wagering brands targeting younger audiences.

With about ten weeks until the start date, operators and their agencies now have a working document to audit existing contracts and campaigns against. Further detail on enforcement is expected once the rules take effect in January.

The Louisiana Gaming Control Board has granted DraftKings a four-month conditional extension of its sports betting permit rather than a full renewal, as regulators look into how the operator uses artificial intelligence and wait on outstanding shareholder suitability filings.

The board voted unanimously on Thursday to extend the permit through 19 February, with the full renewal hearing set for 18 February. DraftKings’ current licence had been due to expire on 10 November, according to US trade press coverage of the hearing.

Seven conditions

The extension carries seven conditions. DraftKings must file outstanding suitability submissions within 30 days, after the Louisiana State Police gaming division found that some shareholders with stakes of 5% or more had not submitted the required paperwork. Within the same window the company must provide written responses on its use of AI, its prediction market activity and its Louisiana digital offerings, and certify that its marketing materials comply with the state’s responsible gambling rules.

State police told the board that their review of recent allegations against the company needed more time. The board stressed that the decision was not a finding of wrongdoing, and its chairman noted that news reports are not findings of regulatory violations.

The AI allegations

Much of the questioning at the hearing centred on a New York Times report alleging that DraftKings uses AI to identify losing bettors and target them with promotions. DraftKings disputed that characterisation at the hearing, saying it looks at financial records to understand whether customers are winning or losing but does not use AI specifically to target losing gamblers.

The allegations have spread quickly through the regulatory system. DraftKings was hit with a class action earlier this month over the alleged targeting of losing bettors. In New York, the State Gaming Commission advanced proposals on 9 October that would bar sportsbooks, their affiliates and vendors from using AI or algorithmic profiling to personalise bonuses, odds, limits and bet suggestions without customer consent. Massachusetts regulators have also questioned operators about AI-driven promotions.

Prediction markets in the frame

The board’s demand for written answers on prediction market activity reflects a second front. DraftKings has launched DraftKings Predictions, offering sports event contracts under federal commodities rules, including in states where its sportsbook is not licensed. State regulators across the country have warned licensed operators that such activity could affect their suitability, and Nevada’s regulators have said sports event contracts are wagers regardless of where they are listed.

Louisiana has its own reasons to probe. The state’s legal sportsbooks compete with prediction market platforms that are available to Louisiana residents without a state licence or state tax. A licensed operator running both products puts the regulator in the position of overseeing a company that is also competing against the state-regulated market it holds a permit for.

What happens next

DraftKings remains free to operate in Louisiana while the conditional extension runs. The 30-day filings will come due in mid-November, and the February hearing will decide whether the board grants a full renewal, imposes further conditions or takes the matter further.

The outcome will be watched by regulators elsewhere. Louisiana is the first state to tie a major operator’s licence renewal directly to questions about AI-driven marketing, and other boards facing renewals in the coming months may follow the same template of written certifications before signing off.