Kalshi v. CFTC - Round 1
Part II - The Question
Ultimately, every law is written with a policy objective in mind. Thus, before we even dive into the laws and how they should be applied, we should answer a basic question as a society.
Should one be able to risk money on a presidential candidate winning the election?
A couple points to make before we answer this question:
Your objective could be different from the policy objective Congress was trying to achieve. But, if we agree that democracy is the best system and Congress simply consists of individuals that we the people have elected as our representatives, then we must also agree that the laws that are drafted to achieve those policy objectives, should be respected.
Notice our choice of words. In the question we posed at the outset, we said “risk money,” we didn’t say “bet money,” even though that appears to be Kalshi’s view of what it offers as well as how it was interpreted by the media (“election betting”). Whether election contracts are betting or not is precisely what determines whether or not they should be offered to the public.
Which is a great segue to the question we posed at the outset.