State seeks triple damages, $100,000 per wager against Polymarket

Polymarket Chief Legal Officer Neal Kumar on Thursday rejected New York Attorney General Letitia James’s gambling lawsuit against the prediction-market operator as a “recycled” filing and said the company would fight the allegations in court.

“Polymarket was founded in a tiny NYC apartment and now has more than 350 employees here, embodying why people and businesses come here to make it,” Kumar said in a statement.

“We believe in New York and we’re staying here. While the AG’s decision to copy/paste a recycled lawsuit is disappointing, we’ll fight for our users.”

The complaint, filed Thursday, accuses Polymarket of running an illegal gambling platform in violation of state law and alleges Polymarket has never been licensed by the New York State Gambling Commission.

“By skirting New York’s laws, Polymarket is targeting the most vulnerable and depriving New York families of critical services and support,” James said in a statement.

The complaint alleges Polymarket permits users over the age of 18 to participate. It cites a report by the state’s Office of Addiction Services and Supports finding that users between 18 and 24 are at “high risk” of developing gambling addictions.

New York is asking the court to order Polymarket to pay three times the amount of any gains derived from operating in the state, along with $100,000 for each attempt or offer of “sports wagering or mobile sports wagering” in New York. The state is also seeking an accounting of all trades placed on Polymarket, including how much users lost and what the company earned.

James’ office filed a parallel lawsuit against prediction-market operator Kalshi in late July, also alleging that company runs an unlicensed gambling operation in New York. Polymarket’s U.S. arm debuted in December and is regulated by the federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The CFTC has not commented publicly on the New York lawsuit.

The CFTC has previously sued several states that have tried to regulate prediction markets, arguing it has authority over the platforms under federal law. New Jersey earlier this month asked the U.S. Supreme Court to decide which regulator oversees prediction markets, after a federal appellate court ruled that federal law supersedes the state’s gambling statutes.