Employee Insider Trading in Prediction Markets: Federal Prosecutions and the Policy Response for All Employers

Joshua Mitts
P. Barrett Morris
Tiffany E. Payne
Nader S. Raja
Joshua Mitts | Columbia Law School
P. Barrett Morris | Moore & Van Allen
Tiffany E. Payne | Moore & Van Allen
Nader S. Raja | Moore & Van Allen

Live Video-Broadcast: September 21, 2026

2 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

The first prediction-market insider trading defendants are already in federal court — and your client’s trading policy doesn’t mention event contracts

Prediction-market insider trading is no longer hypothetical. In United States v. Van Dyke and United States v. Spagnuolo, DOJ and the CFTC brought their first coordinated criminal and civil actions over eventcontract trading. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi have turned confidential workplace information into something employees can trade.

The exposure runs in both directions. Trade on employer data and the government invokes CEA Section 6(c)(1), Rule 180.1, wire fraud, and money laundering. Defend the case and you face parallel proceedings, Fifth Amendment traps, and blockchain forensics. Rely on a securities-only policy and employees trading event contracts fall through the gap — with no duty-creating language to enforce.

Attendees leave with a working framework for managing simultaneous DOJ and CFTC exposure, defense arguments built on Blaszczak II and Chastain, and the drafting elements — updated definitions, covered-person provisions, and training requirements — that produce compliant policy language reflecting 2026 enforcement precedent.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • The Enforcement Landscape
    How United States v. Van Dyke and United States v. Spagnuolo — the first coordinated DOJ/CFTC prediction-market insider trading actions — frame the new enforcement playbook.
  • Government Legal Theories
    How prosecutors combine CEA Section 6(c)(1) and Rule 180.1 misappropriation with wire fraud and money laundering charges — and each theory’s doctrinal limits.
  • Core Defense Arguments
    Where the wire fraud ‘property’ problem after Blaszczak II and Chastain, CFTC jurisdiction over event contracts, and CEA extraterritoriality give the defense leverage.
  • Parallel-Proceedings Strategy
    How to manage simultaneous DOJ criminal and CFTC civil exposure — Fifth Amendment strategy, discovery, and blockchain forensics and wallet-attribution challenges.
  • Closing the Policy Gap
    Why securities-focused trading policies miss event contracts on Polymarket and Kalshi — and the updated definitions, covered-person provisions, and duty-creating language that close the gap.
  • Future-Proof Policies
    How to tailor prediction-market policies for public companies, private firms, universities, healthcare systems, and government contractors while anticipating pending CFTC rulemaking and legislation.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: September 21, 2026 

  • 12:00 pm – 2:10 pm Eastern
  • 11:00 am – 1:10 pm Central
  • 10:00 am – 12:10 pm Mountain
  • 9:00 am – 11:10 am Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Joshua Mitts, David J. Greenwald Professor of Law | Columbia Law School

Joshua Mitts is the David J. Greenwald Professor of Law at Columbia Law School, where his research applies advanced data science — including statistical analysis and machine learning — to corporate and securities law, with a primary focus on informed trading in capital markets and related topics in law and finance.

  • Education & Credentials

Professor Mitts holds a Ph.D. in finance and economics from Columbia Business School (2018), a J.D. from Yale Law School (2013), and a B.A. from Georgetown University (2010).

  • Recognition & Leadership

He joined the Columbia Law School faculty in 2017 as an associate professor of law, was named professor of law in 2022, and now holds the David J. Greenwald chair.

  • Professional Involvement

Professor Mitts is a fellow of the Columbia Law School Program in the Law and Economics of Capital Markets and a member of the Center for Financial and Business Analytics at Columbia University’s Data Science Institute. He taught at the Columbia Law Summer Program in American Law in Amsterdam in 2019.

  • Experience

His research specializations include short selling, securities lending, informed trading on cybersecurity breaches, information leakage and hedge fund activism, insider trading on corporate disclosures, and information transmission in financial markets. He introduced Data and Predictive Coding for Lawyers to the Columbia Law School curriculum.

 

P. Barrett Morris, Head of Swaps & Derivatives | Moore & Van Allen

Barrett Morris brings his in-house legal experience to guide clients on OTC and exchange traded swaps, options, futures, and other derivatives, and provide guidance on related bank regulatory matters.

  • Education & Credentials

Education: J.D., Charlotte School of Law, 2012; B.A., George Mason University, 2008. Admissions: North Carolina, 2013; United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Mr. Morris has been recognized by North Carolina Super Lawyers as a “Rising Star” in Banking (2026). His honors include the Southeastern Legal Awards’ “On the Rise in North Carolina” recognition (2025), Lawdragon 500 X – The Next Generation (2024, 2026), the North Carolina Pro Bono Honor Society (20222023), and the Mecklenburg County Bar YLD Lawyer of the Year Award (2020).

  • Professional Involvement

Mr. Morris serves on the Board of Directors of the Mecklenburg Bar Foundation (Class of 2025) and previously served on the Board of Directors of the Mecklenburg County Bar (2017–2020). He also served as Chair of the Mecklenburg County Bar Young Lawyer Division (2018–2019) and has volunteered as an attorney with the Council for Children’s Rights since 2014.

  • Experience

Barrett leverages his experience working at Wall Street and other large U.S. banks to advise clients on the practical front-office, operational, and compliance requirements arising from a broad range of regulatory requirements involving swaps, derivatives, and digital assets. He regularly assists clients with negotiating, documenting, and executing standard and complex foreign exchange, commodity, and derivative transactions. In prior roles within banks, Barrett advised senior management, governance committees, business and operations groups, and risk and compliance teams on compliance with the Dodd-Frank Act, Commodity Exchange Act, Investment Company Act, and various prudential banking regulations. His experience includes representing swap dealers and financial institutions in complex swap transactions, advising on physical commodity trading and financing activities, developing and implementing pre-hedging policies and procedures, negotiating ISDA Master Agreements, and representing market participants in the negotiation and execution of swap documentation.

 

Tiffany E. Payne, Counsel | Moore & Van Allen

Tiffany Payne advises companies, financial institutions, and individuals in government investigations, regulatory enforcement matters, and complex commercial litigation involving artificial intelligence, digital assets, derivatives, prediction markets, and other emerging technologies. A certified IAPP Artificial Intelligence Governance Professional (AIGP), Tiffany combines her experience in government investigations, financial regulation, and commercial litigation to help clients manage legal risk in fast-moving areas where enforcement risk and business innovation intersect.

  • Education & Credentials

Ms. Payne earned her J.D. from George Washington University Law School, 2008; B.S., University of Virginia, 2005. Admissions: South Carolina, 2021; North Carolina, 2021; USDC, District of South Carolina, 2022; USDC Western District of North Carolina, 2022; USDC District of Columbia, 2011; USCA Ninth Circuit, 2010; District of Columbia, 2009; New York, 2009.

  • Professional Involvement

Inspired by a deep family legacy of military service, Tiffany is a passionate advocate for veterans’ rights. She focuses her pro bono work on helping veterans with “less than honorable” discharges petition military review boards for upgrades to their discharge status based on mitigating factors, ensuring their service is fairly recognized.

  • Experience

Tiffany has nearly two decades of private practice experience in New York, Washington, D.C., and the Carolinas, advising clients in highly regulated industries on complex regulatory frameworks, government investigations, internal reviews, emerging technologies, and high-stakes business disputes. She focuses on identifying and mitigating legal, operational, and reputational risks before they develop into enforcement actions or litigation, with experience in financial services, healthcare, and manufacturing.

Tiffany has developed a niche practice advising clients on the legal and regulatory implications of artificial intelligence, digital assets, derivatives, prediction markets, and other emerging technologies. She counsels organizations on responsible AI adoption, evolving U.S. and international regulations, including the EU AI Act, AI governance, data privacy, vendor management, internal investigations, and operational and litigation risks. She also helps clients develop ethical and effective governance frameworks that balance innovation, regulatory compliance, risk mitigation, human impact, and brand integrity.

Tiffany regularly represents clients facing investigations and enforcement scrutiny from the Department of Justice, Securities and Exchange Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, and state attorneys general. Her matters have involved anti-money laundering, insider trading, market manipulation, accounting independence and standards, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, Commodity Exchange Act and CFTC regulations, securities laws, and False Claims Act defense, including preventative compliance strategies for clients in healthcare, manufacturing, and other industries.

In complex litigation, Tiffany represents clients in federal and state courts nationwide in securities, consumer finance, commercial, regulatory, and business disputes involving securities laws, RICO, TILA, RESPA, FDCPA, unfair and deceptive acts and practices laws, consumer lending laws, breach of contract, business torts, fraud, and probate matters. Her experience includes preparing bespoke AI training materials for financial services legal teams; successfully obtaining motions to dismiss for a Canadian bond fund and a global financial institution in securities and foreign exchange class action litigation; securing a preliminary injunction for an insurance company involving marine vessel insurance claims and potential regulatory and reputational exposure; negotiating a favorable settlement for a private ambulance company in an HHS Medicare investigation; and representing a global financial institution in multiple CFTC and SEC enforcement investigations involving off-channel communications, swaps trading and reporting, and other regulatory matters.

Prior to joining the firm, Tiffany served as Counsel in the New York and Washington, D.C. offices of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP and as an associate in the Washington, D.C. office of Goodwin Procter LLP.

 

Nader S. Raja, Member | Moore & Van Allen

Global financial institutions, public companies, and individuals turn to Nader to provide thoughtful, authoritative advocacy in complex, high-profile disputes and regulatory enforcement matters. Hailed for his steady judgment, analytical rigor, and results-driven approach, Nader is frequently engaged in matters that present significant legal, financial, and reputational risk, including securities and commodities litigation, corporate governance disputes, and investigations arising from trading activity and market conduct.

  • Education & Credentials

Nader earned his J.D. from Wake Forest University in 2010, cum laude, where he was a member of the Wake Forest Law Review, and his B.S. from the University of Virginia in 2007, with distinction. He is admitted to practice in Florida (2013) and North Carolina (2010), as well as before the U.S. District Courts for the Northern, Middle, and Southern Districts of Florida and the Eastern, Middle, and Western Districts of North Carolina.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Nader has been recognized by The Best Lawyers in America for Commercial Litigation (2021–2025) and Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Defendants (2023–2025). He is ranked by Legal 500 US for National Corporate Investigations & White-Collar Criminal Defense and City Elite Rankings for Commercial Disputes (2026), and by Legal 500’s North Carolina Elite for Commercial Disputes (2026). Nader has also been recognized by Business North Carolina Legal Elite as a Young Gun (2018–2019, 2022–2023), North Carolina Super Lawyers as a Rising Star in General Litigation (2014–2021) and Business Litigation (2022–2025), Benchmark Litigation on its 40 & Under List (2024–2025), and Law360 as a Rising Star for Compliance (2020). He received the Sally & Bill Van Allen Public Service Award in 2019.

  • Professional Involvement

Nader is a member of the Mecklenburg County Bar Diversity & Inclusion Committee (Class of 2024) and the North Carolina Pro Bono Honor Society (2017, 2019–2021). He serves as Co-Chair of the MVA Asian Pacific American Lawyers Association (APALA) Business Resource Group and is a member of MVA’s Recruiting, Inclusion & Belonging, and Pro Bono & Public Service Committees. In addition to his commercial practice, Nader is deeply committed to pro bono service, representing individuals in matters involving access to justice and community impact and viewing pro bono work as a core professional responsibility and integral part of his firm’s broader service mission.

  • Experience

Nader represents clients in parallel civil, criminal, and regulatory matters involving the DOJ, SEC, CFTC, FINRA, global trading exchanges, and state enforcement authorities, with experience in investigations presenting significant follow-on litigation and cross-border exposure. His experience includes securing a declination in a DOJ Fraud Section investigation involving alleged commodities and securities fraud and manipulation; defending financial institutions in CFTC and FINRA investigations concerning trading practices, off-channel communications, and regulatory reporting obligations; and representing clients in sanctions-related matters arising from DOJ priorities. Nader also represents clients in complex commercial litigation in federal and state courts nationwide, as well as in domestic and international arbitration. His litigation experience includes securities and corporate governance disputes, shareholder and class actions, consumer lending and credit matters, and other sophisticated commercial litigation involving significant exposure, contested transactions, and core business practices. He advises companies on governance, remediation, and compliance, including the design and implementation of policies, procedures, training, and internal controls intended to prevent, deter, and detect misconduct. Nader was recognized by Law360 as a Compliance Rising Star for his work in this area and is known for delivering strategic, cost-effective representations focused on favorable outcomes and practical solutions.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – Defending Prediction: Market Insider Trading Charges in Parallel DOJ and CFTC Proceedings | 12:00pm – 1:00pm

This session examines the first two coordinated DOJ/CFTC criminal and civil enforcement actions targeting prediction-market insider trading—United States v. Van Dyke (SDNY, April 2026) and United States v. Spagnuolo (SDNY, May 2026)—and equips defense counsel with the legal theories, motion strategies, and parallel-proceedings tactics needed to respond. Attorneys will analyze the government’s misappropriation theory under CEA Section 6(c)(1) and Rule 180.1, the wire fraud ‘property’ problem under Second Circuit precedent, and the extraterritorial and jurisdictional vulnerabilities in both cases. Attendees will leave with a working framework for managing simultaneous DOJ criminal and CFTC civil exposure, Fifth Amendment strategy, blockchain evidence challenges, and pending legislation that could reshape the enforcement landscape.

BREAK | 1:00pm – 1:10pm

SESSION 2 – The Prediction-Market Compliance Gap: Drafting Effecive Prediction-Market Trading Policies for Public Companies and Private Employers | 1:10pm – 2:10pm

Prediction markets have created a new insider-trading risk that must be addressed by employers. Traditional trading policies are typically designed to regulate transactions in stocks and other securities, leaving significant gaps when employees trade event contracts on platforms such as Polymarket and Kalshi. This session equips attorneys with a practical framework for drafting, auditing, and implementing prediction-market trading policies for any employer—public company, private firm, university, healthcare system, or government contractor. Attendees will learn why existing securities-focused insider trading policies are insufficient, and how to close those gaps through updated definitions, expanded covered-person provisions, duty-creating contract language, and training requirements. By the end of the session, attorneys will be able to identify the specific drafting elements their clients’ policies are missing and produce compliant policy language that reflects 2026 enforcement precedent and the evolving CFTC regulatory framework.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Colorado

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

District of Columbia

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Delaware

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Florida

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Georgia

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Iowa

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Idaho

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Illinois

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Indiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Kansas

Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive

Kentucky

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Louisiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Massachusetts

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maryland

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maine

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Michigan

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Minnesota

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Montana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
Nebraska

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

myLawCLE reports attendance to Nebraska on each attorney’s behalf for all programs. Please do not self-report.
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Nevada

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Oklahoma

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

Oregon

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Rhode Island

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

South Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

South Dakota

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Tennessee

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Utah

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Virginia

Not Eligible
2 General Hours

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Washington

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 Law & Legal Hours

Receive CLE credit in Washington via attorney submission.
Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

West Virginia

Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General

Wyoming

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars
iPad for Lawyers: The Complete Mobile Practice Toolkit
iPad for Lawyers: The Complete Mobile Practice Toolkit Wed, August 26, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay
When AI Notetakers Break Privilege in Internal Investigations
When AI Notetakers Break Privilege in Internal Investigations Fri, August 28, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay
Derivatives, Digital Assets, and AI in Financial Markets
Derivatives, Digital Assets, and AI in Financial Markets Fri, September 11, 2026
Live Webcast