The Third Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a facial challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(B) in the case of U.S. v. Aleman-Lozano. ^[1] Kalshi announced that it will not offer prediction markets on whether the Supreme Court will hear a case or the outcome of that decision regarding the platform's regulatory future. ^[2] Judge Peter Phipps concurred in the judgment, arguing that nonimmigrant visa holders are not part of the national political community and thus not protected by the Second Amendment. ^[3] The court concluded that the gun ban is consistent with historical traditions of disarming aliens based on their lack of allegiance to the sovereign, citing English common law and Revolutionary-era statutes. ^[4] The majority opinion, written by Judges Patty Shwartz and Theodore McKee, assumed without deciding that the Second Amendment's 'the people' includes noncitizens who are lawfully present. ^[5] A spokesperson for Kalshi stated that the platform will not list markets where Kalshi's own legal team actions could affect the outcome, citing a conflict of interest. ^[6] New Jersey officials asked the Supreme Court to intervene in a lawsuit seeking to force prediction markets like Kalshi to comply with state laws governing sports betting. ^[7] The legal battle involves a split in lower court rulings, with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in favor of Kalshi in April and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issuing an opposite opinion in a Nevada case. ^[8]