In January, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled 3-0 that the Dormant Commerce Clause does not prohibit states from imposing residency requirements for obtaining marijuana business licenses. The court found that the federal illegality of marijuana renders Dormant Commerce Clause protections inapplicable, cementing a circuit split on the constitutionality of state residency rules for marijuana licenses.

In this crossover episode, Regulatory Oversight host Stephen Piepgrass teams up with Payments Pros host Keith Barnett to unpack how prediction markets, gaming, and payments intersect in a rapidly evolving and legally uncertain landscape. Drawing on Keith’s extensive regulatory experience, they explain what prediction markets are, why these contracts are treated as swaps rather than securities, and how that distinction affects insider trading issues. Stephen and Keith then address the growing tension between federal regulators and state attorneys general over whether these products are trading or unlicensed sports betting, the CFTC chair’s recent criticism of “regulation by enforcement,” and the NCAA’s push to pause college sports contracts. They close by examining what this means for banks, payment processors, and other service providers navigating know-your-customer and “lawful transaction” obligations while the law remains in flux.

What Happened

On January 16, Attorney General (AG) Jason Miyares’ last day in office, the Virginia AG reached a settlement with Viatris, Mylan’s corporate successor, over EpiPen pricing and related practices. The settlement was filed and approved by the Circuit Court for the City of Richmond without issuance of a press release by the Virginia AG.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has sued JustAnswer LLC and its founder and CEO, Andrew Kurtzig, alleging that the online Q&A platform deceives consumers into costly recurring subscriptions without their informed consent, in violation of the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA) and Section 5 of the FTC Act.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has sent warning letters to 10 unnamed companies for practices that may allegedly violate its new Consumer Review Rule. The letters flag potential use of fake or misleading reviews, undisclosed insider endorsements, and suppression of negative feedback. The FTC cautions that violations could trigger enforcement actions and civil penalties exceeding $50,000 per violation.

Stephen Piepgrass, a partner in Troutman Pepper Locke’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy, and Enforcement Practice Group, was quoted in the January 30, 2026 Corporate Compliance Insights article, “CFTC Withdraws Proposed Rule on Prediction Markets.”

“Taken together, these statements leave observers unclear about what position the CFTC may ultimately take on insider trading-type behaviors,” Stephen…

Arizona Attorney General (AG) Kris Mayes recently announced a consent judgment with SimonMed Imaging MSO, LLC (SimonMed), alleging that the medical imaging service provider violated the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act through billing practices the AG claimed were unfair and misleading. SimonMed provides management services, including billing, collections, information technology, and other business administrative services, to SMI Imaging, LLC (SMI), a wholly owned subsidiary of SimonMed Imaging LLC. According to its website, SimonMed Imaging LLC is the largest outpatient physician radiology group in the U.S., and its subsidiary SMI is the provider entity in connection with outpatient imaging clinics in Arizona. SimonMed expressly denies any liability or wrongdoing, and the consent judgment is not to be construed as an admission of wrongdoing or a violation of the law.