Exchange Ranking
Top Exchanges
24h Volume Ranking
Popularity Ranking
Exchange BTC Balance
Proof of Reserves
Decentralized Exchanges
Funding Rate
Funding Heatmap
Liquidation Data
Max Pain
Long/Short Ratio
Whale L/S Ratio
Binance/Okex/Huobi L/S
Bitfinex Margin L/S
ETF Tracker
Solana ETF
XRP ETF
Hong Kong ETF
Bitcoin Treasuries
Crypto Reversal
Ethereum Reserves
HyperLiquid Wallet Analysis
Hyperliquid Whale Watch
Large Transactions
On-chain Movement
Bitcoin ROI
Stablecoin Market Cap
Options Analysis
News
Articles
Economic Calendar
Features
Wallet
Contract Calculator
Security
Collections
Watchlist
FollowingSam Bankman-Fried filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn his fraud conviction and $11 billion confiscation order.
On September 10, 2026, former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to overturn his fraud conviction and an asset confiscation order of up to $11 billion.
Previously, a jury found Bank-Fried guilty of seven counts of fraud, conspiracy and money laundering in orchestrating a multibillion-dollar scheme. The plan is designed to misappropriate client funds and defraud investors and lenders. As a result, he was sentenced to 25 years in prison. In June 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld his conviction and sentencing. The court's reason for its ruling goes straight to the core: the transfer of client funds through fraudulent means will not become legal because the defendant anticipates future return.
Dispute over the admission of evidence
Bank-Fried's defense team pointed out that the trial court made an unfair decision on the admission of evidence. Prosecutors were allowed to show evidence of financial losses suffered by FTX customers, but the defense was prevented from submitting evidence about FTX assets. The defense believes that the assets will ultimately be enough to repay the customer in full.
If, under the "fraudulent inducement" theory adopted by the Supreme Court in 2025, prosecutors do not have to prove actual financial loss to file fraud charges, Bank-Fried argues that the defendant should have the right to submit contrary evidence to support its position. Its lawyers emphasized that FTX's bankruptcy estate had successfully repaid all customers in full, including accrued interest.
Constitutional challenge to forfeiture amounts
In addition, the defense team separately argued that the $11.02 billion confiscation order violated the "Prohibition of Excessive Fines Clause" of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The defense had filed a similar constitutional plea in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, but it was dismissed in a ruling upholding the conviction, sentencing and confiscation order.
In United States v. Bajakajian, the Supreme Court ruled that punitive forfeiture fell within the scope of the Eighth Amendment's Prohibition of Excessive Fines Clause; it was unconstitutional if the amount of the forfeiture was disproportionate to the seriousness of the crime. However, the huge dollar amount alone is not enough to find unconstitutional.
It should be pointed out that filing an appeal petition does not mean that Bank-Fried will be given a retrial or suspend his sentence. The Supreme Court must agree to grant certiorari, and at least four of the nine justices must vote in favor of accepting the case before it can enter the substantive trial stage. Normally, the Supreme Court accepts only a very small number of appeals brought to it for review.
