<span class=”acf-media-credit”><span class=”acf-credit”><span class=”acf-credit”><a href=”https://theblock.co” target=”_blank”>The Block</a></span></span><span class=”acf-credit”> | <span class=”acf-credit”><a href=”https://www.alamy.com/washington-usa-15th-sep-2022-sam-bankman-fried-ceo-and-founder-of-ftx-walks-near-the-us-capitol-in-washington-dc-on-thursday-september-15-2022-graeme-sloansipa-usa-credit-sipa-usaalamy-live-news-image482614948.html?imageid=7DED721D-1E4B-4096-B7F4-6211DA1CFE5A” target=”_blank”>Sipa USA/Alamy Live News</a></span></span></span>
Sam Bankman-Fried has submitted an appeal to the United States Supreme Court seeking the dismissal of his fraud conviction alongside an $11 billion asset forfeiture.
Bankman-Fried, who established and directed the now-defunct cryptocurrency platform FTX, is currently serving a 25-year prison sentence following a jury verdict finding him guilty on seven charges encompassing fraud, conspiracy, and money laundering related to a massive operation that diverted client funds and deceived investors and lenders.
The legal filing asserts that the presiding judge prohibited Bankman-Fried from demonstrating that “FTX and Alameda, while temporarily illiquid, held sufficient assets to ultimately make investors and customers whole,” and that “there were always more than enough assets available to repay customers (as they now have been repaid, with substantial interest).”
Additionally, Bankman-Fried contends that the $11 billion forfeiture mandate breaches the Eighth Amendment provisions prohibiting excessive fines.
Kousisis ruling
During June, a three-judge panel representing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the guilty verdict, citing the Supreme Court’s 2025 precedent in Kousisis v. United States, which established that actions can qualify as wire fraud independently of any intent to cause net economic loss. This legal standard dismissed Bankman-Fried’s absence-of-harm defense.
The initial issue outlined in the petition queries: “In a prosecution under the ‘fraudulent inducement’ theory of fraud—under which it is irrelevant whether victims suffered any financial losses—when, if ever, may the trial court admit evidence indicating whether victims suffered such losses?”
The application argues that such material should have been permitted, claiming the court erred by allowing prosecutors to insinuate substantial client losses while barring the defense from proving that users had been reimbursed.
CNN reports that the Supreme Court is anticipated to announce later this year whether it will accept the lawsuit for review.
Originally published at https://www.theblock.co/news/regulation/2026-09-11-sam-bankman-fried-supreme-court-petition-414226.
