Maryland’s top elections official is trying to pull the plug on online markets that let people put money on who wins at the ballot box, arguing the practice looks a lot like illegal gambling and could undermine trust in the vote.
Jared DeMarinis, the state’s elections administrator, asked Maryland’s Office of the State Prosecutor this week to review the legality of those platforms. He sent the request on July 23, 2026, the same day the state certified its primary results. The move sets up a confrontation between state officials and prediction platforms that insist they operate under federal financial regulations, not state gambling rules.
In a one-page letter obtained by Maryland Matters, DeMarinis asked prosecutors to determine whether contracts sold on sites such as Kalshi and Polymarket “constitute prohibited wagering on election outcomes” under Maryland law and to recommend any appropriate action. He flagged concerns about insider trading and the possibility that campaigns or political operatives could try to nudge events for financial gain. The letter does not explicitly urge prosecutors to go after individual traders, but DeMarinis said he will seek legislative changes if the prosecutor concludes the platforms are lawful.
The platforms are not exactly taking that lying down. Kalshi’s head of enforcement, Robert DeNault, told WBAL NewsRadio that federal regulators and a D.C. court have treated these products as part of the federal derivatives system. He said the company monitors for insider activity and blocks candidates and campaigns from trading. Kalshi and similar exchanges argue they are regulated markets, not sportsbooks, and say they use surveillance and account restrictions to limit manipulation.
Federal fights and state pushback
The legal terrain around event contracts is already crowded. Court filings and public records show the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Control Commission issued a cease-and-desist order to Kalshi in April 2025. Kalshi challenged that move in court, and the dispute is now tied up on appeal. Court documents reviewed at Justia indicate Maryland has argued that some event contracts look a lot like unlicensed sports wagering, while Kalshi points to its federal designation and Commodity Futures Trading Commission rules.
At the same time, Maryland’s Attorney General joined other states in urging the CFTC to clarify who gets to police these event contracts, casting it as a fight over consumer protection and state authority. Maryland Attorney General's Office officials have pressed the commission to recognize state power over sports-related prediction markets while courts and regulators sort out the boundaries.
What the law says
On paper, Maryland’s statute is blunt. State law flatly bans wagering on election outcomes: under Maryland Code § 16-902, “A person may not make a bet or wager on the outcome of an election.” Violations are misdemeanors that can carry a $50 to $500 fine and potential forfeiture of deposits. The wording and penalties are straightforward, but the key legal question is whether federally regulated event contracts fall under that state prohibition or are effectively shielded by federal oversight. The text and penalties of the law are laid out at FindLaw.
DeMarinis told reporters he wants the state prosecutor to resolve that tension. If prosecutors decide the markets do not violate Maryland law, he said he will ask the next General Assembly to tighten the statute to explicitly ban trading on election outcomes. That path, a legislative push following a prosecutorial review, would drop Maryland squarely into the national debate over how prediction markets should be treated. WBAL NewsRadio reported DeMarinis’ plan to seek statutory clarity if needed.
The dispute is not just a local curiosity. Nationally, House and federal investigations have already scrutinized suspiciously timed trades on prediction platforms, and lawmakers have pressed operators on their anti–insider-trading safeguards. Those inquiries underscore why state officials say oversight is urgent. CBS News and other outlets have detailed congressional investigations and prosecutions tied to alleged misuse of nonpublic information on these sites.
For now, Maryland’s referral to the Office of the State Prosecutor will test how far a short, older statute can reach into the world of modern financial products. Regulators, platform operators and lawmakers will be watching closely for a ruling that could determine how, or even whether, election markets operate in Maryland in the years ahead.
