Crypto.com and Novig have filed separate lawsuits in federal court challenging Missouri's enforcement of its sports wagering laws. Both companies filed on October 16, 2026, in response to cease-and-desist letters from Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway's office sent between September 16 and 17.
The letters required the platforms to either cease operations in Missouri or obtain state licenses and pay applicable taxes and fees. Four other companies—Kalshi, Polymarket, Robinhood, and Underdog—received identical letters but have not sued, according to court records.
The Regulatory Dispute
Missouri's position treats the platforms' sports event contracts as unlicensed sports betting under state law. The platforms counter that their contracts are swaps, a category of financial derivatives overseen by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission at the federal level. They argue that federal regulation preempts state gambling rules.
The financial stakes are substantial. Missouri imposes a 10% tax on adjusted gross revenue from licensed sports betting, with application fees reaching $500,000.
Novig, operated by Ludlow Exchange LLC, launched its CFTC-regulated prediction market platform on August 4, 2026. Missouri's regulated sports betting market itself is recent, following voter approval of Amendment 2 on November 5, 2024, and launching on December 1, 2025, under oversight by the Missouri Gaming Commission.
The Attorney General's office also raised age-related concerns for five of the six platforms, citing participation eligibility at age 18. Novig was excluded from this particular complaint.
Legal Challenges Ahead
The platforms face challenging precedent. Federal courts have previously rejected similar federal preemption arguments in disputes over unlicensed sports betting.
The litigation highlights an unresolved regulatory gap: federal derivatives regulators and state gambling regulators are assessing the same products but applying different legal frameworks. Early motions in both the Eastern and Western Districts of Missouri will provide initial signals on judicial direction, particularly regarding whether either judge may grant relief pausing state enforcement.
