U.S. Court Decision Ignites High-Stakes Legal Battle Between Tether and Celsius

A federal ruling just poured gasoline on the crypto industry's most explosive legal feud. Here's what happens when a stablecoin giant and a bankrupt lender clash in court.

The Backstory: Tether's $1 peg faces scrutiny as Celsius creditors demand accountability. The judge's decision could rewrite crypto's liability playbook.

Why It Matters: Billions in user funds hang in the balance—and let's be honest, lawyers on both sides are already calculating their yacht upgrades.

The Fallout: Expect months of procedural fireworks before we see who blinks first. Meanwhile, crypto markets shrug and keep trading—because nothing fuels decentralization like good old-fashioned litigation.

Background of Events

In 2022, as the crypto markets faced significant volatility, Celsius Network encountered intense pressures from margin calls and falling prices. During this tumultuous period, Celsius accused Tether of rapidly disposing of its Bitcoin$109,421 collateral, thereby violating the terms of their agreement and the principles of good faith. Allegedly, this sale occurred at an average price of $20,656 per Bitcoin.

Celsius claims that Tether liquidated the collateral nine hours before the end of a 10-hour grace period for margin calls, thus breaching their agreed terms. This action reportedly inflicted billions of dollars in losses on Celsius, with proceeds allegedly transferred to Tether’s Bitfinex accounts.

Statements from Both Parties

In response, Tether dismissed the lawsuit as baseless and argued that the real issue was Celsius’ failure to provide sufficient collateral. Tether contended that the U.S. courts lacked jurisdiction over this case owing to the international nature of the transactions and requested its dismissal.

“When Celsius chose not to post additional collateral, it directed Tether to liquidate the BTC it held and close the position worth approximately 815 million USD₮.”

“Despite the clarity of the agreement months ago, this case tries to shift Celsius’ management errors onto Tether.”

Additionally, Tether relocated its headquarters to El Salvador in January 2025, a MOVE perceived as strategic to highlight its international status and argue against U.S. legal jurisdiction. Nonetheless, the court concluded it had authority due to Tether’s U.S.-based assets.

The Future of the Case and Market Impacts

The court’s decision to proceed means Celsius’ claims against Tether will undergo detailed examination. The ongoing case will explore whether the parties breached the contract, relevant regulations, and the validity of collateral procedures. This development could set a precedent for relationships and collateral management among major crypto enterprises.

The rapid evolution of cryptocurrencies and high-volume transactions between large companies fuel ongoing discussions about regulatory and legal risks in the sector, especially concerning secured deals and liquidation processes, which investors closely monitor.

In similar cases, parties often present different arguments on implementing current agreement terms and jurisdictional debates within the global legal system. The extent to which relocating a company headquarters affects legal procedures remains uncertain.

In the future, the court’s ruling could influence the financial obligations of both Celsius and Tether, as well as inform policies among other industry players. The case, with its careful scrutiny of all arguments, might serve as a guide for similar disputes.

The U.S. court’s decision to continue the Celsius vs. Tether case has resurrected significant legal discussions in the global crypto market. The court aims to thoroughly examine the terms of the collateral agreement, margin call durations, and liquidation conditions between the two major companies. This legal process is anticipated to provide valuable insights for regulating financial transactions and approaches to interplatform agreements in the industry.