Jovy Dedaj criticizes Connecticut's enforcement against Kalshi
Head of litigation at Kalshi
“This unequal treatment is exactly why federal oversight is necessary.”
The full case
Can Connecticut regulate sports prediction markets as gambling?
Explore the case context, sources and public responses.
Source and context
Original post
About this source
Dedaj responds to the August lawsuit against Kalshi. His assertion of selective enforcement predates Connecticut's broader September actions.
Before the quotation
Responding to Connecticut's lawsuit, Dedaj argues that officials are seeking immediate restrictions against Kalshi while other prediction markets continue operating.
After the quotation
The quoted sentence concludes his argument for federal oversight. This August statement predates the broader September enforcement announcement; the alleged unequal treatment is Dedaj's position.
How this statement is classified
Dedaj's unequal-treatment argument criticizes Connecticut's enforcement choices. It substantively rejects the state's approach rather than merely disputing terminology.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection, Office of the Connecticut Attorney General
More from this case
Read the full case“We support the state’s efforts, including seeking judicial remedies”Read statement
“they are not adhering to Connecticut’s consumer protection standards”Read statement
“You don't protect consumers by blocking exchanges that are actually regulated”Read statement