Coinbase, Kalshi, Kraken Parent Join Amicus Brief Supporting CFTC Authority on Stock Perpetual Futures
Major crypto exchanges and trading firms filed an amicus brief backing the CFTC's right to regulate single‑stock perpetual futures amid a lawsuit by the Capital Markets Alliance.
Key takeaways
- Coinbase, Kalshi, Payward and three trading firms filed an amicus brief defending the CFTC's authority over equity perpetual futures.
- The brief argues that existing federal law already provides joint SEC‑CFTC oversight for security futures, even without a fixed expiry date.
- A federal judge has questioned whether perpetual contracts qualify as security futures, but left the CFTC's approvals in place pending further briefing.
A coalition of crypto‑focused firms, including Coinbase, prediction‑market platform Kalshi, Kraken owner Payward, and trading firms DRW, Jump Trading and Paradigm, submitted a proposed amicus brief to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The filing backs the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s (CFTC) authority to regulate perpetual futures tied to individual U.S. stocks, a stance contested by the Capital Markets Alliance Association in a separate lawsuit.
Background of the Litigation
The Capital Markets Alliance Association, whose members include Cboe and Citadel Securities, sued the CFTC on November 2, 2026, seeking to overturn the agency’s approval of single‑stock perpetual futures submitted by Coinbase Derivatives, KalshiEX and Bitnomial Exchange. The alliance argues that contracts without a set expiration date should be classified as security‑based swaps, placing them under SEC jurisdiction, and claims the CFTC exceeded its statutory authority.
Industry’s Legal Argument
According to the amicus brief, the Commodity Exchange Act already permits perpetual contracts to fall within the security futures framework, even though they lack a fixed delivery date. The filing cites the Act’s definition that a security future cannot be a swap and emphasizes that perpetuals share core characteristics with traditional futures—standardized terms, margin requirements and centralized clearing. The brief also notes that both the CFTC and SEC participated in the public consultation process for the applications, suggesting that joint oversight was contemplated from the outset.
Judicial Response and Next Steps
U.S. District Judge Valerie Caproni denied the alliance’s request for a temporary restraining order on November 3, stating the plaintiffs had not shown immediate harm. While the judge expressed preliminary concerns that perpetual futures might fit the definition of security‑based swaps, she left the CFTC’s approvals intact and ordered the parties to continue briefing the preliminary injunction request. The CFTC’s opposition brief is due November 6, with the alliance’s response scheduled for November 10.
What to Watch Next
The court’s final ruling on whether equity perpetual contracts are security futures or swaps will shape the regulatory landscape for crypto‑derived derivatives. Stakeholders will be monitoring any further briefs filed by the CFTC, the SEC’s position, and potential appellate action if the district court’s preliminary findings are challenged.

Discussion 0