Court rejects CMA's request to suspend single-stock perpetua
Judge Valerie Caproni of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York denied the Capital Markets Alliance's request for a temporary restraining order, and did not pause the CFTC's approval of Kalshi, Bitmomial and Coinbase Derivatives to list U.S. single-stock perpetual futures; the court also found that CMA's claim that the CFTC exceeded its authority is likely to succeed. The CFTC and the plaintiff must each file their responses by November 6 and November 10, respectively.
Event timeline
- [11-04 19:24] U.S. court denies request for temporary restraining order to pause single-stock perpetual futures (PANews)
- [11-04 19:26] Court denies CMA's request to pause single-stock perpetual futures, says claim that CFTC exceeded authority is likely to succeed (Odaily Planet Daily)
Background and impact
At 19:24 and 19:26 on November 4, 2026, PANews and Odaily Planet Daily reported successively that Judge Valerie Caproni of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York denied a request for a temporary restraining order filed by the industry group Capital Markets Alliance (CMA). The request sought to pause the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission's (CFTC) approval of Kalshi, Bitmomial and Coinbase Derivatives to list U.S. single-stock perpetual futures. It should be noted that the PANews article was published on November 4, yet its body is labeled "November 5 news," so the two dates differ.
The court's reasoning has two layers. On the one hand, the court held that the plaintiff failed to show that its members would suffer imminent irreparable harm, and therefore did not grant the temporary restraining order; on the other hand, the court also found that CMA's claim that the CFTC exceeded its authority is likely to succeed, and noted that the contracts in question appear not to meet the definition of "security futures" and are closer to swaps regulated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The two sources are consistent in their description of the above reasoning. Public information shows that CMA's members include institutions such as Cboe and Citadel Securities, and the subject of this dispute is precisely the approval for the above three platforms to list U.S. single-stock perpetual futures.
Under the court's schedule, the CFTC must respond to the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction by November 6, and the plaintiff must reply by November 10. Only the temporary restraining order request was denied this time; the preliminary injunction motion remains in process, and the available materials do not indicate whether the listing arrangements for single-stock perpetual futures have changed as a result. As for the focus of the dispute, the case involves the regulatory boundary between the CFTC and the SEC: whether the contracts in question constitute "security futures" or are closer to swaps regulated by the SEC remains a key point of observation in subsequent proceedings.
For market participants, the current parties to this case are Kalshi, Bitmomial and Coinbase Derivatives; other trading platforms are not involved in the materials. Information that some readers care about, such as Huobi HTX app registration and download, Gate.io app registration and download, Bitget app registration and download, Binance app registration and download, and OKX app registration and download, is unrelated to the subject matter and jurisdictional dispute of this ruling, and the relevant entry points and procedures should be based on each platform's official announcements.
Frequently asked questions
### Does this ruling mean U.S. single-stock perpetual futures can be listed immediately?
It cannot be understood simply that way. What the court denied was the temporary restraining order request; the preliminary injunction motion remains in process: the CFTC must respond by November 6, and the plaintiff must reply by November 10. The materials do not state whether the listing arrangements have changed.
### What is the core legal issue in the dispute?
The core issue is how the contracts approved by the CFTC should be characterized. The court said the contracts in question appear not to meet the definition of "security futures" and are closer to swaps regulated by the SEC, so the boundary of the CFTC's authority has become the point at issue.
### What impact does this have on ordinary crypto trading platform users?
The only platforms involved in the materials are Kalshi, Bitmomial and Coinbase Derivatives. As for the registration and download procedures of platforms such as Huobi HTX, Gate.io, Bitget, Binance and OKX, this case does not mention them; please refer to each platform's official channels for information.