Coinbase, Kalshi and allies back CFTC in stock perpetuals court fight

Six crypto heavyweights want in on a federal court fight over perpetual futures tied to individual US stocks. Coinbase, Kalshi, Kraken parent Payward, DRW, Jump Trading and Paradigm have asked a judge for permission to file a friend-of-the-court brief backing the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The move follows the approval of new stock-linked perpetual products earlier this month, according to the block.co.

The Capital Markets Alliance Association is the plaintiff, and it argues these contracts belong inside the securities-law framework rather than under the CFTC's treatment of security futures. The six firms counter that the law allows the agency's approach and that blocking the products would leave US traders with offshore alternatives only. Both sides are staking out legal positions in a live dispute — nothing has been decided in either's favor.

Judge Valerie Caproni denied a request for a temporary restraining order, meaning the plaintiff didn't get an immediate halt. Read carefully, that isn't a win for the regulator either: the judge signaled the plaintiff was likely to succeed on the statutory question but had failed to show the imminent irreparable harm emergency relief requires. A failed emergency application is not a ruling that the products are lawful.

The structure at the center of it all is a perpetual futures contract — economic exposure to price swings with no preset expiration date, a staple of crypto trading. Point it at a single listed US company and a statutory question opens up: which agency's rules govern the product, and what obligations fall on the exchange that lists it. Classification shapes customer protections, margin requirements, market surveillance and whether the product can lawfully be offered to eligible participants at all.

Next up: whether the judge accepts the proposed outside briefs, how the plaintiff's latest reply answers the statutory objections, and what relief the court considers appropriate. A preliminary-injunction fight and the broader merits can still generate more decisions, and both sides can file additional arguments. There is no final ruling on whether stock perpetuals stay available.

The case tests how US financial regulation bends around perpetual trading conventions, and its outcome could shape future listings. For now the narrower facts hold: the CFTC's approvals are under challenge, and the industry is organizing a legal defense.