This article reflects information available as of May 15, 2026 and incorporates developments through that date. The Senate hearing is scheduled for May 20, 2026. BettingOffice.us will publish updated coverage following the hearing.

The witness table at room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building will hold five chairs on Wednesday, May 20, 2026, at 10:00 AM ET. The first body of the U.S. Senate to ever address the convergence of regulated sportsbooks and prediction markets in a single proceeding will hear testimony titled “No Sure Bets: Protecting Sports Integrity in America.” The stakes: a $167 billion American sports wagering economy, three live federal bills, and a circuit-split court fight that has already pulled in 38 attorneys general.

Why This Hearing Matters Now

Federal interest in sports betting has surged in less than a year. The American Gaming Association reported a $167 billion U.S. handle for 2025, up roughly 23% year over year. Thirty-nine states plus the District of Columbia now permit some form of sports wagering. More than one in four American adults holds an active sportsbook account, and that share rises above half among men under 50, according to data cited by Courthouse News.

The risk side has scaled with the action. The National Council on Problem Gambling estimates 3.5 million Americans show severe gambling-related harm and roughly 3 million more are at risk. That backdrop, combined with a 2025-2026 wave of integrity scandals, has converted what was once a state-by-state regulatory mosaic into a federal policy emergency.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee), who chairs the subcommittee, has framed the issue around competition itself. Fair play is the foundation of American sports, she said in announcing the hearing, pointing to recent match-fixing cases as evidence that integrity is now under direct pressure. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who chairs the full Commerce Committee, has been blunter, saying fans shouldn’t have to wonder if their favorite player missed a buzzer-beater because of a hidden wager.

That framing is the political bridge into a hearing that will spend most of its three hours on the second-order question: how the United States should regulate the new layer of prediction markets that, in many states, now operate alongside or in direct competition with licensed sportsbooks.

The market did not slow down while Congress prepared its questions. On May 14, 2026, Polymarket announced an exclusive U.S. prediction-market partnership with Italy’s Serie A, its third major soccer-league deal of the year. The cadence underscores why the hearing has shifted from theory to triage: prediction-market operators are signing sports-league agreements at a pace that outruns the regulatory clock.

The Scandals That Forced Washington’s Hand

The April 2026 indictment of Master Sergeant Gannon Van Dyke is the most distinctive case so far. Prosecutors allege the U.S. Army Special Forces soldier traded $409,881 in profits on Polymarket using classified information about Operation Absolute Resolve, a U.S. effort to capture Nicolás Maduro. The Department of Justice and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed parallel charges on April 23, 2026 (CFTC Press Release 9217-26). The case is being treated as the first real-world application of Section 4c(a)(4) of the Commodity Exchange Act, the so-called “Eddie Murphy Rule” added in 2010 to prohibit insider trading on event contracts.

The NCAA point-shaving conspiracy unsealed in January 2026 is broader by any measure. Federal prosecutors charged 20 individuals with corrupting 39 NCAA athletes across more than 17 Division I programs and at least 29 manipulated games. Bribes ranged from $10,000 to $30,000 per athlete. According to court filings, 15 of the 20 defendants had played NCAA basketball during the 2023-24 or 2024-25 seasons.

The pro side is not insulated either. NBA guard Terry Rozier was arrested in October 2025 on allegations he simulated an injury to leave a game and let bettors cash on related prop bets. A subsequent indictment, made public in early 2026, named a former NBA player and a current NBA head coach. As of mid-May 2026, federal prosecutors are expected to file a superseding indictment adding sports bribery and honest services wire fraud charges. Rozier’s attorneys are simultaneously moving to dismiss the original counts, setting up a procedural collision the week of the hearing.

The case most directly tied to the hearing’s “integrity monitoring failed” theme involves Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby. The five-star transfer, who reportedly signed a $5 million to $6 million NIL deal, faces investigation over roughly 10,000 alleged wagers placed through commercial gambling apps, including bets on his former team Indiana while he played there in 2022. Sorsby has retained Jeffrey Kessler, the attorney who represented Tom Brady during Deflategate. Public records show ProhiBet, the Big 12 compliance system, flagged Sorsby’s profile in August 2025; he played 12 games after that. The probe has now escalated to three parallel state regulators alongside the NCAA: the Indiana Gaming Commission, the Ohio Casino Control Commission (which opened its own investigation on May 8, 2026), and Kentucky Horse Racing & Gaming, which is coordinating with the NCAA. In mid-May 2026, Sorsby announced he would enter a residential gambling-addiction treatment program; his 2026 college eligibility is openly in doubt, with Kessler publicly working to negotiate a three- to six-game suspension settlement rather than a season-ending ruling.

Layered on top of all of this: the April 2026 disclosure that three congressional candidates traded their own races on Kalshi, drawing suspensions and fines. An NPR report on May 11, 2026 widened the scope further, with a campaign staffer on a Southern statewide race describing routine pre-poll-release trading on prediction markets by staffers across multiple campaigns. That sequence pivoted federal attention from sports integrity alone to political integrity inside the same prediction-market venues, and is the reason Sen. Klobuchar’s End Prediction Market Corruption Act is suddenly drawing bipartisan cosponsor interest.

The Five Witnesses: Who’s Testifying and What They’ll Say

The witness table is the analytical heart of the hearing. The Senate office published the panel on May 7, 2026, with a fifth name added late: Dr. Harry Levant of the Public Health Advocacy Institute.

Bill Miller, President and CEO, American Gaming Association

Miller has led the AGA since 2019 and represents the licensed sportsbook industry. The AGA’s Q1 2026 Industry Outlook reports that 81% of operator executives now describe prediction markets as a “very significant threat” to their business. Miller’s testimony is expected to argue for what he has previously called a “level regulatory playing field”: prediction-market operators should meet the same KYC, age verification, and responsible-gambling standards that licensed sportsbooks already shoulder. The AGA has publicly endorsed the Prediction Markets Security and Integrity Act of 2026.

Mary Beth Thomas, Executive Director, Tennessee Sports Wagering Council

Thomas brings the state-regulator perspective. Tennessee is one of several states that issued cease-and-desist letters to prediction-market operators in early 2026. After Kalshi sued, a federal court granted Kalshi a preliminary injunction against Tennessee’s enforcement order. Thomas is expected to defend state authority over gambling and to call for any federal framework to preserve, not preempt, state regulators. Her appearance turns the hearing into a live exhibit of the federal-versus-state preemption fight currently moving through five circuit courts.

Scott Sadin, Co-Founder and CEO, Integrity Compliance 360

Sadin’s firm provides integrity monitoring to a majority of major U.S. and international leagues. IC360’s tooling reportedly flagged several of the high-profile 2025 cases now driving the hearing. His testimony is likely to focus on the technical reality of monitoring: how alerts are generated, what gets caught, and what slips through. Two structural concerns are expected: player props as the dominant integrity vector, and microbetting (in-game, second-by-second markets) as the fastest-growing risk surface.

Hon. Patrick McHenry, Senior Advisor, The Coalition for Prediction Markets

McHenry’s presence is the political wild card. The North Carolina Republican chaired the House Financial Services Committee until his retirement at the end of 2024. Months later he became a senior advisor to the principal lobbying coalition for Kalshi and other prediction-market operators. McHenry is expected to argue that prediction markets are financial instruments under exclusive CFTC jurisdiction by way of Dodd-Frank preemption, putting them outside the reach of state gambling regulators. He arrives with a tailwind: CFTC Chair Michael Selig stated in early May 2026 that prediction markets and sports betting are two separate things and signaled the agency intends to treat event contracts as financial products rather than entertainment. Senators are likely to test how the former chairman reconciles that position with rules he once oversaw, and whether Selig’s framing survives questioning from Sen. Klobuchar and the public-health voice on the panel.

Dr. Harry Levant, Director of Gambling Policy, Public Health Advocacy Institute

Levant was added to the panel on May 7, 2026. The Public Health Advocacy Institute, based in Boston, treats gambling expansion through a public-health lens rather than a financial or competition one. Levant’s testimony is expected to focus on addiction prevalence, advertising saturation, and youth exposure. Common Sense Media research suggests roughly 49% of 17-year-old boys and 36% of all 11-to-17-year-olds have engaged with gambling-style content. With Levant on the panel, the balance of stated views tilts toward three caution-leaning voices (Miller, Thomas, Levant) against one industry-friendly voice (McHenry) and one neutral-technical voice (Sadin). With this lineup, the hearing’s narrative is unlikely to favor an unregulated path for prediction markets, but the legal preemption question remains entirely separate from public sentiment.

The Senators Asking the Questions

Seven senators are expected at the dais, and each brings a personal angle.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee), the subcommittee chair, represents a state that lost its enforcement battle against Kalshi in federal court. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the full committee chair, has spoken publicly about integrity risk and has signaled openness to federal intervention. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) is the ranking member, and Washington remains one of several states actively contesting Kalshi’s footprint. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) authored the End Prediction Market Corruption Act, which would bar federal officials from trading on prediction markets. Sen. Todd Young (R-Indiana) sits in the chair of a state whose gaming commission is one of two state regulators investigating Brendan Sorsby. Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-New Mexico) and Sen. John Thune (R-South Dakota) round out the panel.

The bipartisan composition is the unusual part. Federal sports-betting policy has had no comparable political consensus since the 2018 repeal of PASPA, and even that earlier moment was driven by the Supreme Court rather than Congress.

Three Federal Bills Already on the Table

The Prediction Market Act of 2026, introduced by Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York) and David McCormick (R-Pennsylvania) on April 30, 2026, is the most comprehensive proposal. Its eight provisions include a ban on political insider trading by Congress members, the President, the Vice President and senior officials; CFTC-administered insider-trading standards for all event contracts; segregation of customer funds; mandatory self-exclusion and age-verification programs; the creation of a CFTC Office of the Retail Advocate; and an Advisory Council on Consumer Protection paired with an Innovation Advisory Committee. The bill carves out a limited preservation of state authority.

The End Prediction Market Corruption Act, authored by Sen. Klobuchar earlier in 2026, is narrower. It would prohibit federal officials, including members of Congress, the President, and the Vice President, from trading on prediction markets using non-public information. It is a direct legislative response to the Van Dyke indictment and to ongoing reporting on Sen. John Fetterman’s market activity.

The Prediction Markets Security and Integrity Act of 2026 is still circulating for cosponsors. Backed publicly by the AGA, it would require prediction-market operators to register with the CFTC (or a newly created body) and to meet AML and consumer-protection standards aligned with those imposed on licensed sportsbooks.

Three bills, one hearing, and an active circuit split add up to the most concentrated federal attention on sports betting since PASPA’s repeal in 2018.

Meanwhile, in the States: A Parallel Regulatory War

The federal stage is only one front. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court heard Kalshi’s appeal on May 4, 2026. Justice Scott Kafker told Kalshi’s counsel during oral argument that he felt the company was swimming upstream. Thirty-eight state attorneys general, in a bipartisan grouping, filed an amicus brief supporting Massachusetts. The verdict is pending and could land during or shortly after the May 20 hearing.

The federal appellate map is fragmenting in real time. The Third Circuit ruled for Kalshi out of New Jersey in April 2026. The Ninth Circuit heard the Nevada matter the same month. The Fourth Circuit took oral arguments in the Maryland case in May 2026. Arizona has charged Kalshi with 20 criminal counts in March 2026, and the CFTC has filed suit against five states (Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, New York, Wisconsin) over what the agency characterizes as overreach into a federally preempted area.

A circuit split this wide tends to attract the Supreme Court. Whether the Senate hearing accelerates or slows that path is one of the questions worth watching.

What to Watch on Wednesday, May 20

Several specific exchanges will define how the hearing is reported. The first is whether senators ask McHenry directly how he reconciles his prior chairmanship of House Financial Services with his current role advocating on behalf of CFTC-regulated entities. The second is whether Bill Miller volunteers data on monitoring failures inside the licensed sportsbook segment (the Caesars Northeastern incident, the Sorsby ProhiBet escape, and others) or focuses purely on prediction-market risks.

The third is whether Mary Beth Thomas walks the committee through the Tennessee versus Kalshi case as a concrete example of preemption in action. The fourth is whether Dr. Levant cites specific youth-exposure numbers, particularly the Common Sense Media data points on 11-to-17 year-olds. The fifth is whether any senator signals a clear preference among the three pending bills, which would dramatically narrow the post-hearing legislative path.

One wildcard: the Massachusetts SJC ruling could drop while the hearing is in session. If it does, expect senators to fold it into questioning in real time.

What This Means for U.S. Bettors

For the audience that places real wagers, nothing changes inside any sportsbook app on May 20. Federal action moves at federal pace, though Sen. Blackburn has now signaled that her subcommittee intends to produce a recommendation framework before the August 2026 recess, narrowing the typical congressional drift to roughly a 90-day window. In the short term, expect tightening on player props, microbetting menus, and advertising guardrails as licensed operators preempt the regulatory direction. State regulators are already moving on prop-bet limits independent of the hearing.

The medium term, six to 18 months, is where structure could shift. If the circuit split forces Supreme Court intervention, a federal framework becomes more likely. The longer arc points toward convergence: DraftKings’s Q1 2026 strategy disclosures already discussed prediction-market product integration, and other licensed operators are likely to follow.

Practical reading for U.S. bettors: stick with state-licensed operators that publish their license numbers; understand the legal distinction between a sportsbook wager and a prediction-market event contract (the consumer protections are not equivalent); and track state-level moves that affect your residence. A complete state-by-state betting guide covers current legal status across all 50 jurisdictions, with deeper reads available for the states most directly involved in the May 20 testimony, including Tennessee, Massachusetts, and Indiana. Operator-level details, including license footprints and product roadmaps, are in our DraftKings review and FanDuel review.

Recent Sports Betting Scandals Driving the Hearing

May 20 is the moment a single committee room briefly contains every fault line of the U.S. sports-wagering debate: the pace of integrity scandals, the legal status of event-contract markets, the preemption fight, the public-health load, and the political stakes for senators with state-specific exposure. None of it is settled in three hours. All of it gets sharper afterward.