The National Football League has weighed in on a high-profile legal dispute over prediction markets, telling the Supreme Court that sports prediction contracts are effectively gambling and should be regulated by the states, according to CNBC.

The league made its position known in an amicus brief supporting New Jersey regulators in their ongoing battle against Kalshi, a company that operates prediction markets. An amicus brief allows an outside party with an interest in a case to share its views with the court, even though it is not directly involved in the litigation.

At the heart of the NFL’s argument is the claim that sports prediction contracts function as gambling. By framing these contracts in that way, the league is pushing for them to be treated under the same regulatory umbrella that governs other forms of sports betting.

The NFL’s brief also addresses the question of who should oversee these markets. The league argues that regulation should rest with the states rather than at the federal level, aligning its stance with that of the New Jersey regulators it is supporting.

The dispute reflects a broader clash over how prediction markets should be classified and controlled. Companies such as Kalshi have built platforms that allow users to trade on the outcomes of events, raising questions about whether those offerings cross into territory traditionally reserved for regulated gambling.

The matter is now before the Supreme Court, where the outcome could help determine how prediction markets operate in the United States and which authorities have the power to regulate them.