Connecticut announced cease-and-desist orders against nine prediction-market platforms on 10 September 2026, directing them to stop making sports event contracts available to state residents. The state also issued nearly 30 subpoenas while expanding its investigation into unlicensed sports wagering.
The action covers Polymarket, Coinbase, Crypto.com, Robinhood, ProphetX, Novig, Webull, Gemini and Underdog Predict. A state release names 29 subpoena recipients across gaming services, media, app distribution and payments, while stressing that receipt of a subpoena is not itself an allegation of wrongdoing.
What Connecticut announced
The 10 September state release says the Department of Consumer Protection issued nine cease-and-desist orders and nearly 30 subpoenas. The action targets sports event contracts that the state classifies as unlicensed gambling.
Connecticut's position is that only licensed sportsbooks operating under its gaming framework may offer sports wagering in the state. The release says prediction markets have accepted participation from people under the state's gambling age of 21 and from people on the voluntary self-exclusion list. It also says the products included Connecticut collegiate sports, which state law restricts.
These are the state's allegations and legal position. The release does not reproduce the nine new orders, and it says copies are available by request. BETTIMES therefore reports the scope stated by Connecticut without treating the announcement as a final merits judgment in every dispute involving every platform.
The nine platforms named
Connecticut lists Polymarket, Coinbase, Crypto.com, Robinhood, ProphetX, Novig, Webull, Gemini and Underdog Predict. Some are known primarily as financial or cryptocurrency services, while others focus on event contracts or sports predictions. Their different business models do not change the fact that the state release names all nine in the same enforcement action.
| Role | What it means | Where to verify |
|---|---|---|
| Nine prediction markets | Cease-and-desist orders | The state ordered sports event contracts and other unlicensed online gambling offers to stop in Connecticut. |
| Nine licensed service providers | Subpoenas | The state seeks information; the recipients are not described as investigation targets. |
| Fifteen media organisations | Subpoenas | Advertising or distribution information may be relevant to the investigation. |
| Five app and payment businesses | Subpoenas | Apple, Google and Stripe entities are named as information holders in the release. |
The consumer-facing name should not be confused with the legal operator or regulated entity. The BETTIMES guide to what a gambling operator is explains why each platform, corporate entity and licence claim needs to be checked separately.
What the orders require
The announcement says all nine platforms must immediately stop advertising, offering, promoting or otherwise making available sports event contracts or any other form of unlicensed online gambling to Connecticut residents. It warns that non-compliance may lead to civil or criminal consequences under the cited state laws.
The release then says "all three platforms" were ordered to allow Connecticut residents to withdraw funds, despite the same section listing nine platforms. That wording appears to carry over from an earlier three-platform action. Without the actual nine orders, BETTIMES cannot confirm whether the withdrawal direction applies identically to all nine.
That discrepancy is material and should not be silently corrected. The reliable facts are that nine cease-and-desist recipients are listed and that the state describes a withdrawal requirement. The exact recipient scope of that sentence requires the underlying orders or a clarification from DCP.
Who received subpoenas
The release names nine businesses licensed in Connecticut as gaming service providers: PayPal, LexisNexis, Plaid, Paysafecard, Integrity Compliance 360, SportRadar Solutions, Genius Sports Media, Genius Tech International and Socure.
It also lists 15 media organisations, including statewide and local news outlets, broadcasters, ESPN and radio groups. A further group includes Apple App Store, Google Play, Apple Pay, Google Wallet and Stripe. Together, the named lists contain 29 recipients, matching the state's description of nearly 30 subpoenas.
Connecticut explicitly says businesses receiving subpoenas are not under investigation but may hold information relevant to the prediction-market inquiry. A subpoena compels or requests information under legal authority; it does not prove that the recipient participated in unlawful conduct.
Why sports event contracts are disputed
Prediction markets typically allow users to buy and sell yes-or-no contracts tied to future events. When the contract concerns a team, player, score, point spread or season result, Connecticut says the economic activity is sports wagering regardless of the event-contract label.
Some prediction-market operators argue that federally regulated event contracts fall within the exclusive authority of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Connecticut rejects that position for sports contracts offered to its residents and says state gambling and consumer-protection rules still apply.
The distinction is not merely vocabulary. It determines the regulator, minimum age, permitted events, self-exclusion controls, technical standards, advertising rules and customer-funds protections. The BETTIMES gambling licence guide explains why product scope and jurisdiction must be verified together.
The Kalshi litigation behind the action
Connecticut's 26 August announcement says the state sued Kalshi and sought an injunction to stop unlicensed sports wagers. That release describes an earlier federal decision denying Kalshi's request to block Connecticut enforcement and says Kalshi appealed to the Second Circuit.
The state also says the CFTC sued Connecticut and two other states, advancing the view that prediction contracts fall under exclusive federal regulation. Those proceedings mean the state-federal boundary remains contested even as Connecticut continues to enforce its own position.
The 10 September action names nine platforms but does not say that the same procedural posture applies to each. Some may have different registrations, products, corporate structures or pending cases. The Kalshi dispute supplies context, not a universal judgment against every company on the list.
Connecticut's licensed sports-betting framework
The Department of Consumer Protection's gaming laws and regulations hub links the state's online casino, retail betting, online sports wagering and fantasy-contest statutes and regulations. The 10 September release identifies DraftKings through Foxwoods, FanDuel through Mohegan Sun and Fanatics through the Connecticut Lottery as the three platforms licensed to offer sports wagering.
Connecticut sets 21 as the minimum age for online or in-person gaming and sports wagering, while fantasy contests have a minimum age of 18. The state also operates a voluntary self-exclusion framework. Its enforcement argument is that unlicensed event-contract platforms do not sit inside those same controls.
A product visible in an app store is not proof of state gaming permission. The BETTIMES licence verification process starts with the exact hostname or app, legal entity, activity and current register entry.
What the action means for media and suppliers
The subpoena list shows the breadth of the information chain around event contracts. Payment processors may hold transaction records, identity services may hold verification data, sports-data companies may document feeds, media businesses may hold advertising records and app stores may hold distribution information.
Again, the release says recipients are not under investigation. The immediate lesson is about evidence preservation and regulatory reach, not guilt. Businesses receiving a lawful request need to determine its scope, preserve relevant records and respond through counsel or their compliance process. The BETTIMES overview of transaction monitoring explains how event and payment records support a separate risk-control process without deciding the legal status of a product.
For operators and suppliers, the action also highlights the risk of classifying a product from its marketing label alone. Contract design, settlement mechanism, consumer location and underlying event are more useful than the word prediction when assessing regulatory exposure.
What consumers should know
Connecticut residents using a named platform should read direct notices from the platform and state rather than assume that every product or account function has stopped in the same way. The public release describes an immediate halt to sports event contracts and refers to withdrawal access, but its three-versus-nine wording needs clarification.
Users should keep statements, transaction histories and correspondence if they have funds or an unresolved complaint. The state directs gaming-related concerns to the Department of Consumer Protection and publishes self-exclusion and problem-gambling support routes.
BETTIMES does not determine whether an individual contract is enforceable or whether a specific account qualifies for a withdrawal remedy. Those questions depend on the actual order, platform terms and applicable law.
What remains unresolved
The nine orders and subpoenas were not attached to the announcement reviewed by BETTIMES. Their exact addressees, legal citations, response deadlines and document requests therefore cannot be confirmed from the public release alone.
The scope of the withdrawal instruction also remains unclear because the release lists nine platforms but refers to all three in that sentence. A later correction or publication of the orders could resolve the mismatch.
Finally, the broader federal-versus-state jurisdiction question remains in litigation. The September enforcement step is current and operative as Connecticut's stated position, but it should not be described as the final national rule for all event contracts.
Frequently asked questions
Which prediction markets did Connecticut order to stop?
The state named Polymarket, Coinbase, Crypto.com, Robinhood, ProphetX, Novig, Webull, Gemini and Underdog Predict. The orders concern sports event contracts and other activity Connecticut characterises as unlicensed online gambling offered to state residents.
How many subpoenas did Connecticut issue?
The state describes nearly 30 subpoenas. Its public lists name nine licensed gaming service providers, 15 media organisations and five app-distribution or payment businesses, for 29 named recipients. Receipt of a subpoena is not presented as an allegation that the recipient violated gambling law.
Are prediction markets the same as sportsbooks?
The products use different market structures, but Connecticut says sports event contracts function as sports wagers when they turn sporting outcomes into tradable yes-or-no positions. Some operators dispute state authority and argue for exclusive federal commodities regulation. That jurisdictional issue remains contested.
Can Connecticut users withdraw their money?
The release says platforms were ordered to allow Connecticut residents to withdraw funds, but the relevant sentence says all three after listing nine recipients. BETTIMES treats the precise scope as unconfirmed until DCP publishes the orders or clarifies the text. Users should follow official and platform-specific instructions.
Is the Connecticut action a final court decision?
No. It is a state enforcement announcement covering cease-and-desist orders and subpoenas. Separate litigation involving Kalshi and federal regulatory authority continues. The release also says subpoena recipients are information holders rather than targets of the investigation.
The current position
As checked on 13 September 2026, Connecticut has publicly named nine cease-and-desist recipients and 29 subpoena recipients in its expanded prediction-market inquiry. The orders reflect the state's view that sports event contracts are unlicensed wagering, while the wider jurisdictional dispute remains active.