FTX Founder’s Conviction Reexamined After GENIUS Act Passage

The conviction of FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) in late 2023 is being reevaluated following the passage of the GENIUS Act. Initially found guilty of improperly moving funds between ventures, new regulatory clarity has prompted experts to reconsider the case. The collapse of FTX in 2022 revealed that one-third of its assets were held in FTT tokens—quasi-stablecoins tied to exchange revenue. This development has sparked discussions about the implications of the GENIUS Act on past cryptocurrency-related convictions and the future of digital asset regulation.

GENIUS Act Passage Sparks Reevaluation of Sam Bankman-Fried’s Conviction

The conviction of FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) in late 2023 is under scrutiny following the passage of the GENIUS Act. Jurors initially found him guilty of improperly moving funds between ventures, but new regulatory clarity has prompted experts to reconsider the case.

FTX’s collapse in 2022 revealed that one-third of its assets were held in FTT tokens—quasi-stablecoins tied to exchange revenue, as detailed in Michael Lewis’s book *Going Infinite*. This challenges the narrative that SBF misused customer funds, suggesting instead that assets were wagered on his leadership.

The GENIUS and CLARITY Acts now establish definitive rules for stablecoins and token issuers, aligning with SBF’s lobbying efforts. Critics dismissed his Washington outreach as political maneuvering, but supporters argue he sought a framework to legitimize crypto. With these laws enacted, his actions appear less suspect—a bid for stability in a sector long plagued by regulatory ambiguity.

Ripple CTO Rejects Forbes Article Defending SBF’s Criminal Conduct

Ripple Chief Technology Officer David Schwartz has publicly dismissed a Forbes article that sought to defend Sam Bankman-Fried's actions during his tenure at the now-defunct FTX exchange. The article argued that Bankman-Fried's lobbying efforts for crypto regulation should mitigate his culpability in the misuse of customer funds. Schwartz categorically rejected this argument, stating that regulatory advocacy cannot excuse criminal financial misconduct.

The Forbes piece portrayed Bankman-Fried as a champion of crypto industry interests, but Schwartz countered this narrative as dangerously misleading. He emphasized that the jury's verdict finding Bankman-Fried guilty of fraud was justified, regardless of his regulatory efforts. Financial laws exist precisely to prevent the unauthorized use of customer assets, Schwartz noted, and innovation must operate within these legal boundaries.

This rebuke comes as the crypto industry continues grappling with its regulatory future. While some advocate for more flexible frameworks to accommodate innovation, Schwartz's comments reinforce that existing financial laws still apply. The case serves as a stark reminder that even in crypto's disruptive ecosystem, traditional standards of financial integrity remain paramount.