cryptd.in

암호화폐 친화적인 인재를 위한 대체 링크드인

Why A U.S. Court Says Binance Is Not (Yet) Liable for Terrorist Crypto Flows

-

by

cryptd.in
in

A lawsuit accusing the crypto exchange Binance of allowing terrorism financing by facilitating it has fallen apart after a US Federal court dismissed it.

Not Terrorist Supporters

The Troell et al. v. Binance case was dismissed in an opinion and order issued on March 6 by Judge Jeannette A. Vargas of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The defendants’ motions were granted against a complaint brought by 535 plaintiffs, all of whom were victims or family members of victims of terrorist attacks.

The Accusation

The plaintiffs accused Binance, Changpeng “CZ” Zhao (its founder and former CEO) and BAM Trading Services (the company behind the Binance.US exchange) of facilitating 64 terrorist attacks carried out between 2016 and 2024. They claimed that Binance, Zhao and BAM Trading allowed wallets allegedly tied to Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, al‑Qaeda, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and Iranian proxies to move funds, amounting to aiding and abetting terrorism under the U.S. Anti‑Terrorism Act and the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA).

Why The Crypto-Terror Financing Case Fell Apart

The court granted the motions to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), finding that the complaint failed to plausibly allege that Binance “knowingly provided substantial assistance” to the specific attacks at issue.

The Judge’s Two Big Criticisms

Judge Jeannette Vargas’s opinion is based on two fundamental weaknesses she identified in the plaintiffs’ theory. First, although the complaint leaned heavily on blockchain traces, sanctions‑list designations and reports of terrorist groups using Binance, it did not plausibly show that Binance, Zhao or BAM Trading knew at the time that specific wallets on the platform were controlled by FTO (Foreign Terrorist Organization) or their close associates.

Second, the court held that the plaintiffs failed to connect the alleged crypto flows on Binance to the 64 terrorist attacks they invoked. The complaint mapped out millions of dollars in transactions involving “FTO‑associated” or Iran‑linked wallets and described a broad ecosystem built to fund operations, but it did not identify who owned the wallets at issue, when specific transfers took place, what role those transfers played in operational planning. It also didn’t identify how any given Binance‑processed transaction materially advanced the specific bombings, rocket attacks, shootings, hostage‑takings, or the Wizard Spider ransomware incident that harmed the 535 plaintiffs.

The Law Behind The Reasoning

Under the U.S. Anti‑Terrorism Act and JASTA (The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act), it is not enough to show that designated terrorist organizations or sanctioned Iranian actors touched a platform at some point in time. Victims must plausibly allege that the defendant knew who it was dealing with and that its conduct was closely linked to the attacks at issue, not just to terrorism “in general.”

In this case, the judge held that generalized allegations about “terrorist‑associated wallets” on Binance, and references to lax KYC (Know Your Customer), VPN loopholes, and U.S. user evasion, did not amount to a concrete showing that Binance’s services materially advanced the operations that the plaintiffs suffered.

Plaintiffs still have 60 days to refile, so, in truth, Binance is not entirely out of the woods yet. Besides, Binance remains under intense scrutiny: the exchange is still navigating a $4.3 billion AML and sanctions plea deal, a court‑appointed monitor, and political pressure in Washington over alleged terror‑finance exposure, as detailed by Bitcoinist and NewsBTC.

Bitcoin, BTC, BTCUSD

Cover image from ChatGPT, BTCUSD chart from Tradingview

댓글

답글 남기기

이메일 주소는 공개되지 않습니다. 필수 필드는 *로 표시됩니다

최신 피드

인기 카테고리

ko_KR 한국어
ko_KR 한국어 en_US English ro_RO Română et Eesti ja 日本語 ru_RU Русский de_DE Deutsch es_ES Español zh_CN 简体中文 fr_FR Français zh_TW 繁體中文 pt_PT Português it_IT Italiano pl_PL Polski tr_TR Türkçe nl_NL Nederlands id_ID Bahasa Indonesia el Ελληνικά uk Українська bg_BG Български cs_CZ Čeština fi Suomi hu_HU Magyar lv Latviešu valoda lt_LT Lietuvių kalba nb_NO Norsk bokmål sk_SK Slovenčina sl_SI Slovenščina sv_SE Svenska

웹사이트 검색

인기 스토리

태그

#AlexeyPertsev (1) #BidenCryptoBan (1) #BidenElection (1) #BinanceVsCoinbase (1) #B비트코인 (425) #BitcoinETF (3) #B비트코인기초 (1) #B비트코인 취급 (1) #B비트코인가격 (5) #B비트코인가격수준 (1) #B비트코인펌프 (1) #B비트코인예치 (1) #B비트코인서지 (1) #BitcoinTop (1) #Bitfinex (1) #B비트 단위 (1) #브레이스브리지캐피털 (1) #BRC20토큰 (1) #BTC취득 (1) #B울리스틱 예측 (1) #BullishSentiment (1) #C중국광업 (1) #CPIP리뷰 (1) #CryptoAsset (2) #CryptoBattle (1) #CryptoBoom (1) #CryptoExpert (1) #CryptoInsights (1) #CryptoMania (1) #CryptoMarket (4) #CryptoPrediction (1) #CryptoPredictions (1) #CryptoRegulation (2) #CryptoTakeoff (1) #CryptoTiming (1) #CryptoTips (1) #CryptoTreasury (1) #CryptoUncertainty (1) #DerivativeJump (1) #Dogecoin (73) #DogecoinGains (1) #DogecoinVolume (1) #DutchCourt (2) #ECommerce (1) 1TP5테엘살바도르비트코인 (1) 1TP5테더리움 (69) 1TP5테더리움통증 (1) 1TP5테더리움가격 (1) 1TP5전문가 의견 (1) #FedRateCut (1) #FiatCurrency (1) #FinancialImpact (1) #FinancialPrivacy (1) #FirmShutdown (1) #FrozenAccounts (1) #IllicitFunds (1) #인플레이션데이터 (1) #투자 (1) #투자손실 (1) #일본기업 (1) #LegalAction (1) #LegalImpact (1) #법률 (1) #라이트닝 네트워크 (1) 1TP5시장분석 (3) 1TP5시장 모니터링 (1) 1TP5시장 예측 (1) 1TP5시장 예측 (1) #MarketProjection (1) 1TP5마켓지원 (1) 1TP5시장변동성 (1) #M결혼 (1) #MemeCoin (5) #MemeCoins (2) #M광부수익성 (1) #MoneyLaundering (2) #MtGox (4) 1TP5북한암호화 (1) 1TP5노보그라츠예측 (1) #P가격 마일스톤 (1) #P가격 예측 (2) #P가격 질문 (1) #PriceSurge (1) #P형량 (1) #QuantAnalysis (1) 1TP5규제압력 (1) #SEC안티크립토 (1) #ShibaInu (5) #SocialBuzz (1) 1TP5기술분석 (1) #Toncoin (3) #TornadoCash (3) #TornadoCashDev (1) 1TP5토네이도캐시개발자 (1) #UKCrypto (1) #업사이드 잠재력 (1) #USCongress (1) #와이오밍랜드 (1) #XRP가격 (1) #XRP업스윙 (1)

유용한 링크

유용하다고 생각되어 공유하고 싶은 링크.