Four states, four ad bans, four enforcement fights. Google won’t say the two are connected — but the pattern is hard to miss.
Google has banned prediction markets advertising in Michigan and New York, effective 13 July 2026. The two states join Nevada and Ohio on the restricted list. Google did not explain the additions. However, all four states have taken enforcement action against prediction market operators or challenged sports event contracts.
- What Google Changed
- The Court Losses Behind the Pattern
- Why Prediction Markets Keep Losing Ad Access
Google has prohibited prediction markets advertising in Michigan and New York. The ban took effect on 13 July 2026. The company announced it in an update to its Prediction Markets Policy the same day. Both states join a restricted list that already covered Nevada and Ohio. Ohio was added in June, Nevada earlier this year. So four US states now bar these ads entirely on Google’s platforms. According to the policy, only federally regulated operators may advertise in approved jurisdictions. However, Google gave no reason for the two additions. The timing invites an obvious question.
What Google Changed
The policy sets a high bar even where advertising is permitted. Eligible advertisers need Commodity Futures Trading Commission authorisation as a Designated Contract Market. Alternatively, they need National Futures Association registration to provide access to products listed by an eligible DCM. So federal financial regulation, not state gambling licensing, gates access. That framing matters. Google treats compliant prediction markets as regulated financial products, not gambling operators. However, the state-by-state carve-outs cut across that logic. Michigan and New York are now closed regardless of an operator’s federal credentials. The prohibition covers prediction market contracts and related products. It applies to advertising, not to the platforms themselves. As a result, operators can still serve permitted markets but cannot promote through Google’s ad network in four states. The classification fight recurs globally, as our report on the Dutch KSA’s Polymarket ruling shows.
The Court Losses Behind the Pattern
Both new states recently beat Kalshi in court. In Michigan, Ingham County Circuit Court Judge Rosemarie Aquilina ordered Kalshi to stop offering sports event contracts to state residents on 29 June. The court later extended that order. Kalshi has until 12 August to geofence Michigan or face fines of $500,000 per day. In New York, US District Judge Analisa Torres denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction on 7 July. The court found Kalshi had not shown a likelihood of success on its federal preemption argument. That argument holds that federal law overrides New York’s gambling statutes. The ruling lets the state keep enforcing those statutes while the case proceeds. However, Google has not linked its policy to any of this. The company disclosed no reasoning at all. One earlier data point complicates simple assumptions. When Ohio was added in June, its Casino Control Commission said it had not requested Google’s action. So the restrictions do not appear to follow regulator demands directly. The litigation remains live and Kalshi’s arguments untested at final judgment.
Why Prediction Markets Keep Losing Ad Access
The classification question drives everything. Prediction markets argue they list financial contracts under CFTC oversight. States argue sports event contracts are sports betting under another name. Both positions have serious backing. Google’s policy sits awkwardly between them. It accepts federal financial regulation as the qualifying credential. However, it also carves out states where that credential is contested. So the platform is neither endorsing nor rejecting the preemption argument. It is stepping back where the law is unsettled. That is a defensible commercial posture for an advertising platform facing legal ambiguity. In contrast, an operator needs certainty to build a market. Losing ad access in four states, including New York and Michigan, removes significant reach. The pattern also matters beyond the US. European regulators are pursuing similar questions, with nine announcing a joint initiative against unlicensed prediction markets. Trade coverage of prediction markets, including AGBrief, tracks these developments. The sector’s growth features in our report on iGaming trends in 2026, and the advertising-restriction trend appears in our coverage of the UK’s sponsorship ban.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where has Google banned prediction markets advertising?
Google now prohibits prediction market contract advertising in Michigan and New York, effective 13 July 2026. They join Nevada and Ohio, which were added earlier. The prohibition covers prediction market contracts and related products, applying to advertising rather than the platforms themselves.
Why did Google add Michigan and New York?
Google did not explain. However, both states recently won court rulings against Kalshi, and all four restricted states have taken enforcement action against prediction market operators. When Ohio was added in June, its Casino Control Commission said it had not requested Google’s action.
Who can advertise prediction markets on Google?
Only federally regulated operators in approved US jurisdictions. Advertisers need Commodity Futures Trading Commission authorisation as a Designated Contract Market, or National Futures Association registration to provide access to products listed by an eligible DCM. Federal financial regulation gates access, not state gambling licensing.
What did the Michigan court order against Kalshi?
Judge Rosemarie Aquilina ordered Kalshi to stop offering sports event contracts to Michigan residents on 29 June. The court later extended the order, giving the company until 12 August to geofence the state or face fines of $500,000 per day. The litigation remains ongoing.
What happened in the New York case?
US District Judge Analisa Torres denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction on 7 July. The court found Kalshi had not demonstrated a likelihood of success on its argument that federal law preempts New York’s gambling statutes, letting the state continue enforcement while the case proceeds.
Are prediction markets gambling?
That is the contested question. Operators argue they list financial contracts under CFTC oversight. Several US states argue sports event contracts are sports betting under another name. European regulators have reached differing conclusions too, with the Dutch KSA treating one platform’s offering as illegal gambling.
This article has been thoroughly researched and reviewed by the CasinoBait editorial team to ensure accuracy and relevance for Asian casino players.
