District Judge Jeannette Vargas dismissed a massive civil lawsuit seeking to hold Binance and its co-founder, Changpeng Zhao (CZ), liable for facilitating transactions linked to 64 terrorist attacks around the world.
The court decision did not focus on whether terrorist groups used the platform or not, but rather on direct legal liability. Judge Vargas determined that the plaintiffs they failed to prove a «guilty association.»
For the court, The relationship between Binance and the aforementioned organizations was purely commercial and «distant.» In simple terms: having an account on a site does not make the site owner complicit in the user’s crimes, unless there is an explicit desire for such crimes to occur.
After learning of the ruling, Changpeng Zhao did not take long to go to the social network X to defend the integrity of its business model. Under the premise that “the truth always comes with time,” CZ explained his perspective with cold financial logic.
There is absolutely no reason for a CEX to have anything to do with terrorists. I imagine they do not operate actively (no commission income). They can try to deposit and then withdraw immediately (this neither generates profits).
Changpeng Zhao (CZ), co-founder and former CEO of Binance
CZ emphasized that, beyond ethics, illicit financing is simply bad business which only brings regulatory and operational risks without economic benefits.
The clash of perspectives: crime or tool?
This ruling comes at a time of maximum political friction. While figures like Senator Elizabeth Warren insist that cryptocurrencies are criminals’ «new favorite method» of evading sanctions, justice appears to demand a much higher standard of proof than political rhetoric.
As NoticiasVE has reported, despite this ruling, the US Senate keeps Binance under scrutiny, accusing the platform of its historical failures in identity controls (KYC). However, the court’s decision suggests that the gap between administrative negligence and terrorist complicity is, legally, a chasm.
The path is not completely clear. The judge has left the door open for the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint. Binance’s future now depends on whether it manages to definitively separate its operations from any malicious actor, in a cryptocurrency ecosystem that remains under the scrutiny of regulators.