The defendants include Kalshi Inc., KalshiEX LLC, Kalshi Klear Inc., Kalshi Klear LLC and Kalshi Trading LLC, alongside Susquehanna International Group LLP and Susquehanna Government Products LLLP.
Utah alleges the Susquehanna firms act as institutional counterparties, routinely taking the other side of retail customers’ wagers, including those placed by Utah residents. The complaint characterizes that activity as accepting and profiting from illegal bets. Its claims include public nuisance, unjust enrichment and civil conspiracy, alongside requests for declaratory and injunctive relief. It also seeks punitive damages and reimbursement of the state’s nuisance-abatement costs.
The market-making relationship itself was publicly announced by Kalshi in April 2024. That release identified Susquehanna Government Products as a dedicated institutional market maker providing liquidity to the exchange.
Citing testimony by Kalshi’s head of markets in the earlier federal case, the new complaint says 55,819 accounts had registered with Utah addresses as of Feb. 25, 2026. Of those, 32,940 had completed sign-up, including identity verification. Those figures describe accounts at that date, rather than a current tally of active traders.
Federal Protection Denied
The enforcement action follows an Aug. 4 ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert J. Shelby granting summary judgment to Utah officials and denying Kalshi a preliminary injunction. Kalshi had argued that the Commodity Exchange Act preempted state restrictions on its federally regulated exchange. Shelby concluded the federal law did not preempt Utah’s ability to enforce its anti-gambling laws.
That position is not uniform across courts. As The Defiant previously reported, an Illinois federal judge on Oct. 2 granted partial preliminary-injunction requests by Kalshi, Coinbase and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, finding that state licensing requirements likely conflicted with federal law governing certain sports contracts.
Kalshi appealed its Utah defeat. A subsequent order from Shelby records that the Tenth Circuit denied Kalshi’s request for an injunction pending appeal on Sept. 8. On Oct. 14, Shelby denied the parallel request before his own court as moot because the appeals court had already denied the same relief.
