Federal prosecutors say they are reviewing additional NBA games as part of an expanding investigation into illegal betting tied to inside information and suspected manipulation. The update surfaced in court in late January 2026 as prosecutors described the work as ongoing and broader than the games already named publicly.
The case has already generated criminal charges and league discipline. Prosecutors’ remarks indicate the public list of affected games may not be complete, even if new contests have not yet been identified in open filings.
Prosecutors signal more games are under review
In court, attorneys for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York said the investigation is still developing and that a defendant tied to the scheme was involved in other games that have not been made public. That statement is the clearest sign yet that the government believes the activity may have touched more than the seven games referenced in earlier materials.
The government has not yet named additional games or new defendants in the same matter. But the court update suggests future filings could expand the factual record and widen the circle of scrutiny beyond what bettors and sportsbooks have seen so far.
The alleged edge: inside information hitting player props
Federal charging documents released in October 2025 described a network that used nonpublic information and, in some instances, alleged in-game manipulation to target betting markets. Player props were a central focus because they can be influenced by minutes, health, and usage decisions that are not always known publicly in real time.
The investigation has intersected with high-profile league action. The NBA permanently banned Jontay Porter in 2024 for violating the league’s gambling rules, including disclosing confidential information.
Why regulators keep circling back to prop restrictions
Integrity experts and some policymakers view player props as a concentrated risk. One player’s actions can swing an outcome, making these markets more sensitive to compromised information than standard game lines.
If prosecutors ultimately name more games, pressure could rise for tighter, more standardized prop controls across books and jurisdictions. The near-term marker is whether the government adds facts or defendants through new filings as the investigation continues.
