FTX founder SBF’s litigation may take ‘months or years’
- The new charges brought by the U.S. government after his extradition to the U.S. may violate its treaty with the Bahamas.
- SBF’s actions did not deprive Alameda lenders of their contractual rights to collect on existing loans.
The lawyers said that a recent Supreme Court judgment implies that he did not commit fraud.
FTX lawyers argue…
SBF’s lawyers contended that the charges brought by the U.S. government after his extradition may violate the U.S.-Bahamas treaty. He held the right to challenge any such attempt in the international courts.
The U.S. government argued last month that it could ask the Bahamas for permission to levy more fees, and that it had jurisdiction because SBF’s actions affected crypto markets in the U.S.
At press time, Bankman-Fried was under house arrest. However, he pleaded not guilty to wire fraud and money laundering accusations.
In a decision involving state contract bidding, the Supreme Court recently narrowed down the reach of federal fraud provisions. The action has spurred SBF’s counsel team to bolster its argument.
This and other cases undercut the arguments that Bankman-Fried defrauded a bank and those lending money to his hedge fund, Alameda Research, could, in principle, still receive their money back as the firm is wound up, his lawyers argued.
Alameda lenders not deprived of their rights
According to the filing, SBF’s actions did not deprive Alameda lenders of their contractual rights to collect on existing loans. In the FTX bankruptcy proceedings, Alameda’s lenders are aggressively enforcing their interests.
It further claimed that Bank-1’s right to control access to its bank accounts is no longer a valid property right as a result of the Supreme Court’s opinion, which dismissed allegations that SBF misrepresented the purpose of a bank account established for his firm North Dimension.