Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CFTC declares market emergency, orders Kalshi to continue to operate in New York

cftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–226 of 226 posts

Re: CFTC declares market emergency, orders Kalshi to continue to operate in New York

#221

Post by yencabulator »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #220
yencabulator wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide abortion provider locating services from an office in Texas?

I was specifically responding to this part of what DannyBee wrote: "The claim they are trying to prevent them from offering all event contracts nationwide is simply false."

As far as I can read it, no such attempt has been made. New York is saying certain things are illegal in New York. It seems New York is not attempting to have any say over what Kalshi does outside of New York, when it does not involve New York residents.

Yes, it's mighty inconvenient to have an office in a state that thinks your business activity is illegal. Maybe don't do that.

Re: CFTC declares market emergency, orders Kalshi to continue to operate in New York

#222

Post by rahimnathwani »

yencabulator wrote: post #221
rahimnathwani wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was specifically responding to this part of what DannyBee wrote: "The claim they are trying to prevent them from offering all event contracts nationwide is simply false."

As far as I can read it, no such attempt has been made. New York is saying certain things are illegal in New York. It seems New York is not attempting to have any say over what Kalshi does outside of New York, when it does not involve New York residents. Yes, it's mighty inconvenient to have an office in a state that thinks your business activity is illegal. Maybe don't do that.

As I said earlier, the complaint says "within or from New York OR to persons in New York" (emphasis mine).

This is inconsistent with your statement "It seems New York is not attempting to have any say over what Kalshi does outside of New York, when it does not involve New York residents."

Re: CFTC declares market emergency, orders Kalshi to continue to operate in New York

#223

Post by yencabulator »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #222
yencabulator wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I can read it, no such attempt has been made. New York is saying certain things are illegal in New York. It seems New York is not attempting to have any say over what Kalshi does outside of New York, when it does not involve New York residents. Yes, it's mighty inconvenient to have an office in a state that thinks your business activity is illegal. Maybe don't do that.

As I said earlier, the complaint says "within or from New York OR to persons in New York" (emphasis mine). This is inconsistent with your statement "It seems New York is not attempting to have any say over what Kalshi does outside of New York, when it does not involve New York residents."

Doing said thing inside New York with New York employees != doing it outside of New York, not involving New York residents.

Re: CFTC declares market emergency, orders Kalshi to continue to operate in New York

#224

Post by rahimnathwani »

yencabulator wrote: post #223
rahimnathwani wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said earlier, the complaint says "within or from New York OR to persons in New York" (emphasis mine). This is inconsistent with your statement "It seems New York is not attempting to have any say over what Kalshi does outside of New York, when it does not involve New York residents."

Doing said thing inside New York with New York employees != doing it outside of New York, not involving New York residents.

I addressed this in my earlier comment with a question:

"Would they have to immediately move their HQ and fire all New York based employees?"

Re: CFTC declares market emergency, orders Kalshi to continue to operate in New York

#225

Post by yencabulator »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #224
yencabulator wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing said thing inside New York with New York employees != doing it outside of New York, not involving New York residents.

I addressed this in my earlier comment with a question: "Would they have to immediately move their HQ and fire all New York based employees?"

That sounds like a voluntary action they can decide to do, not something the state of New York is telling them to do. As far as I can tell, all they're being asked is to not break New York laws within New York. It's unfortunate if that was the whole extent of their business.

If a state decided to make trampolines illegal (sale, use and manufacture), it would suck to own a trampoline factory in that state. That's still not a nationwide ban.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidd_v._Pearson

Re: CFTC declares market emergency, orders Kalshi to continue to operate in New York

#226

Post by DangitBobby »

gamblor956 wrote: post #215
DangitBobby wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a creative ruling in multiple senses of the word. They invented the idea from whole cloth and it effectively created new laws from the bench. > The Court decided that Filburn's wheat-growing activities reduced the amount of wheat he would buy for animal feed on the open market, which is traded nationally, is thus interstate, and is therefore within the scope of the Commerce Clause. Although Filburn's relativel…

No, they didn't invent the idea wholesale. There were similar issues dating back to the founding of the country. However nobody pays those any heed because it destroys the ideological claims they're trying to make.

> No

Oh, okay. We'll just pretend this makes any fucking sense. Glad that's all cleared up!

Post reply on HN