Trump Backs Prediction Markets in Legal Fight with State Regulators

In a significant political and regulatory maneuver, former President Donald Trump has positioned himself as a staunch ally of the controversial prediction market industry, actively supporting companies in their escalating legal battles against state gambling authorities. The move comes as scrutiny intensifies over his family's financial and advisory ties to the sector, setting the stage for a major conflict over how these platforms are governed. Trump made his support explicit in a recent post on his Truth Social platform, singling out leading prediction market firms Kalshi and Polymarket. "We are setting the rules of the road that are the gold standard for the states," he declared, adding that the companies "will thrive" under his leadership. He proceeded to disparage governors from several states who have sought to regulate the platforms, which allow users to wager billions of dollars each week on outcomes ranging from sports and elections to federal policy decisions. This public endorsement aligns with concrete administrative actions; a Trump administration official confirmed the federal government has both rolled back relevant regulations and initiated lawsuits against states attempting to apply traditional gambling statutes to these companies. The advocacy is underscored by notable familial connections within the industry. Donald Trump Jr., the former president's son, holds an advisory role with both Kalshi and Polymarket. Furthermore, his venture capital firm, 1789 Capital, is a major investor in Polymarket, directly linking the Trump family's financial interests to the industry's growth and legal success. These ties have drawn increased examination as the regulatory fight unfolds. This development signals a firm commitment to a deregulatory approach for prediction markets during a potential second Trump term, potentially creating a federal shield against state-level enforcement. The stance challenges the authority of state gambling commissions and frames the issue as one of innovation versus outdated oversight, guaranteeing continued legal and political contention over the future of this multi-billion-dollar online sector.