Two U.S. federal courts have dismissed all Anti-Terrorism Act claims against Binance within two weeks, delivering a pair of decisive legal victories for the world’s largest crypto exchange in cases alleging it helped fund 64 terrorist attacks.
The latest blow landed on March 12, when an Alabama federal judge threw out every claim in a 19-page ruling that called the plaintiffs’ filing a “shotgun pleading.” The complaint failed to specify claims clearly and lumped all defendants together without distinguishing individual conduct.
It was the second time in less than two weeks that a federal judge examined the terror-financing case against Binance and found nothing.
535 Plaintiffs, 64 Attacks, Zero Proof
The first case collapsed on March 6. Judge Jeannette A. Vargas in the Southern District of New York dismissed all claims brought by 535 plaintiffs who alleged Binance provided material support for attacks carried out by Hamas, Hezbollah, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, al-Qaeda, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and ISIS between 2016 and 2024.
Her 62-page ruling was blunt. Plaintiffs failed to show that Binance knowingly assisted terrorists, associated itself with the attacks, or conspired with any terrorist organization.
The lawsuit had previously drawn attention for alleging the exchange facilitated over $1 billion in transactions to militant groups. But the court found the accusations relied on broad claims about terrorist use of digital assets rather than concrete evidence tying specific Binance transactions to specific attacks.
Judge Vargas granted plaintiffs 60 days to file an amended complaint. Binance’s legal team says the fundamental deficiencies cannot be cured.
Alabama Judge Delivers an Even Harsher Verdict
Six days later, a federal judge in Alabama piled on. The 19-page ruling dismissed every claim and described the complaint as legally and factually deficient.
The core criticism: plaintiffs failed to meet even the basic pleading standard of providing a “short and plain statement” of their claims. They grouped all defendants together without distinguishing who did what.
The Alabama plaintiffs have until April 10 to fix the deficiencies. The judge warned that failure would mean full dismissal.
Eleanor Hughes, Binance’s General Counsel, declared the ruling a “complete vindication.”
“The court has unambiguously rejected the false and damaging narrative that Binance assisted terrorists.”
CZ Fires Back: ‘Absolutely Zero Motive’
Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, who stepped down as Binance CEO after pleading guilty to AML violations in 2023, responded within hours of the New York ruling. His take was characteristically direct.
False news is temporary.
Truth always comes with time. 💪Adding some logic here. There are absolutely zero (0) motive for any CEX to have anything to do with terrorists. I imagine they don’t actively trade (no fee revenue). They may try to deposit and then immediately withdraw… https://t.co/dOe8WjsySw
— CZ 🔶 BNB (@cz_binance) March 7, 2026
Source: @cz_binance on X
CZ’s argument cuts to the business logic: terrorists generate no trading fees and simply try to move funds through as quickly as possible. No exchange profits from that activity.
From $4.3 Billion Fine to Legal Offensive
These victories cap a remarkable legal turnaround. In November 2023, Binance pleaded guilty to anti-money laundering and sanctions violations, paid a record $4.3 billion fine, and CZ resigned. It looked like the end of an era.
Then the tide shifted. The SEC dropped its lawsuit against Binance in 2025, part of a broader regulatory recalibration in Washington. Now two federal courts have rejected terror-financing claims entirely.
And Binance has gone on offense. On March 11, the exchange filed a defamation lawsuit against Dow Jones, publisher of The Wall Street Journal, over a February article claiming the exchange fired staff who flagged compliance concerns about Iran-linked transactions. Binance says the departures were over data protection breaches, not retaliation.
CZ himself has previously threatened defamation suits against Bloomberg over separate reporting disputes. The exchange appears increasingly willing to weaponize litigation in its own defense.
But the picture is not entirely rosy. Binance still operates under a U.S.-appointed compliance monitor, and reports surfaced the same week that the Department of Justice is investigating whether Iran used the platform to evade sanctions.
The Clock Is Ticking
Both ATA cases are technically alive. New York’s plaintiffs have until early May. Alabama’s deadline is April 10.
If the plaintiffs can’t draw a line from specific Binance transactions to specific terror attacks, these cases are finished. Both judges made that clear.
For Binance, the real threat isn’t civil lawsuits from terror victims. It’s whatever the DOJ finds when it looks at Iran.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, legal, or investment advice. Cryptocurrency investments carry significant risk. Always conduct your own research before making any financial decisions.
