The CFTC entered the criminal Polymarket case against U.S. Army soldier Gannon Ken Van Dyke on Aug. 24 after a federal judge granted the regulator permission to file an amicus brief.
Summary
- Judge Margaret Garnett allowed the CFTC to file its contested amicus brief on August 24.
- Van Dyke may answer new CFTC arguments through a ten-page filing due September 9, 2026.
- Prosecutors allege thirteen Polymarket wagers generated approximately $409,881 using classified information before Maduro’s capture.
- The defense argues geopolitical event contracts are bets rather than swaps governed by federal commodities law.
- CFTC civil proceedings remain stayed pending resolution of the related federal criminal prosecution in Manhattan.
Van Dyke’s lawyers had opposed the request. They argued that the CFTC was attempting to defend its regulatory authority through the criminal prosecution while its parallel civil lawsuit remained paused.
Judge Margaret Garnett rejected the request to exclude the brief but said the court would give the regulator’s arguments “appropriate weight.” Van Dyke has pleaded not guilty to charges arising from Polymarket wagers that allegedly generated $409,881.
CFTC can defend its Polymarket interpretation
The CFTC requested permission to address Van Dyke’s argument that the Venezuela-related Polymarket contracts were bets rather than swaps regulated under the Commodity Exchange Act.
The regulator argues that event contracts can qualify as swaps when their value depends on events carrying financial, economic or commercial consequences. The Maduro contracts could have related consequences for Venezuelan bonds, oil prices and the country’s currency, according to the CFTC’s civil complaint.
Van Dyke’s attorneys contend that this interpretation stretches the swap definition beyond its statutory limit. They say the contracts were straightforward geopolitical wagers with no underlying financial product or commercial exposure.
“The CFTC is no sheep ‘friend of the Court’ here,” the defense wrote, describing the regulator as a “regulatory wolf.” The language represents legal advocacy, not a court finding.
The defense also disputes whether CFTC Rule 180.1, which prohibits fraud connected with swaps, can support the commodities fraud charge under the circumstances alleged.
Judge gives Van Dyke until September 9
Garnett added the CFTC’s proposed amicus brief to the criminal record. The order does not decide whether the contracts qualify as swaps or whether the disputed charges will survive.
The judge gave prosecutors and Van Dyke until Sept. 9 to answer any CFTC argument not already addressed in their motion-to-dismiss filings. Each optional response may contain no more than 10 pages.
The deadline makes the regulator’s swap interpretation part of the court’s consideration before it rules on dismissal. A decision against the CFTC’s position could narrow how federal commodities law applies to prediction markets.
Van Dyke’s criminal trial remains tentatively scheduled for Dec. 7. A status conference is expected on Sept. 28, although disputes involving classified evidence or the dismissal motion could alter that schedule.
Soldier allegedly earned $409,881 from 13 bets
The Justice Department alleges that Van Dyke participated in planning and executing Operation Absolute Resolve, the U.S. military operation that captured former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro on Jan. 3.
According to the federal indictment, Van Dyke placed approximately $33,934 through 13 Polymarket trades between Dec. 27 and Jan. 2. The markets covered Maduro’s removal, U.S. forces entering Venezuela, a potential invasion and presidential war powers.
Prosecutors allege that the trades produced approximately $409,881 in profit after several contracts resolved in Van Dyke’s favor. They also accuse him of transferring proceeds through a foreign cryptocurrency vault and attempting to conceal accounts linked to the activity.
Those allegations remain unproven. Van Dyke faces charges including commodities fraud, wire fraud, misuse and theft of government information, and conducting a monetary transaction involving allegedly criminal proceeds.
Civil Polymarket case remains paused
The CFTC brought a parallel civil action on April 23, its first insider trading case involving prediction-market event contracts. The regulator is seeking restitution, disgorgement, financial penalties, trading bans and an injunction.
The agency’s complaint invokes the “Eddie Murphy Rule,” which prohibits certain uses of misappropriated government information when trading swaps.
A federal judge has paused the parallel CFTC lawsuit until the criminal proceeding ends. Van Dyke’s lawyers argue that the regulator should defend its legal interpretation in that lawsuit rather than enter the criminal matter.
The dispute reaches beyond one trader. In related coverage, the CFTC has been developing updated federal rules for prediction markets as courts consider whether event contracts fall under federal derivatives law or state gambling regimes.
