Giganti v. Moynihan et al

A Wisconsin radio host challenges the threatened loss of his vote for purchasing election contracts on a federally regulated exchange

Case Stakes

(i) Whether Wisconsin may deny an otherwise qualified citizen the right to vote solely because he purchases the identified election contracts.

(ii) Whether that exclusion violates equal protection.

(iii) Whether conditioning Giganti’s right to vote on abandoning his proposed expressive activity violates the First Amendment.

(iv) Whether existing procedures provide constitutionally adequate notice and an opportunity to contest the rejection of his challenged ballot during canvassing.

Case Story

Wisconsin law, Wis. Stat. § 6.03(2), prohibits a person from voting in an election if that person has a direct or indirect interest in a “bet or wager” depending on the election’s outcome. In July 2026, the Wisconsin Elections Commission adopted staff guidance applying that restriction to prediction-market election contracts. Its subsequent press release, “Don’t Bet on Your Ballot,” warned that voters who purchase election contracts and vote in the same election could face voting-qualification challenges and referral to a district attorney. Voting while disqualified can carry felony penalties.

Joseph Giganti, Sr. hosts The Regular Joe Show, a nationally syndicated radio program based in Green Bay. He wants to purchase a modest amount of election contracts on Polymarket US, a federally regulated exchange, and communicate his political forecasts to his listeners. He also plans to vote in person on November 3, 2026. He has refrained from making the purchases because of the threatened voting disqualification and related prosecution.

On October 17, 2026, the Competitive Enterprise Institute filed suit on Giganti’s behalf in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The complaint challenges the application of Wisconsin’s voting restriction to his intended transactions. It argues that excluding him from voting would impose an unconstitutional burden on his right to vote, deny him equal protection, and condition that right on surrendering activity protected by the First Amendment.

The complaint also alleges that existing canvassing procedures could leave Giganti without timely notice and a meaningful opportunity to contest the rejection of his challenged ballot.

CEI argues that Wisconsin’s separate prohibitions against election bribery and fraud protect election integrity without excluding Giganti from voting solely because of his intended purchases. The complaint also points out that voters routinely have financial interests affected by election outcomes through employment, investments, and government contracts without losing their voting rights.

Giganti seeks declaratory and injunctive relief protecting his ability to make the identified purchases and have his November 3 ballot counted. He has requested a preliminary injunction before Election Day.