Sam Bankman-Fried, aka SBF, doesn’t have many doors left to push. The one he has just chosen leads to the American Supreme Court. Sentenced to 25 years in prison after the bankruptcy of FTX, the former boss of the crypto platform is demanding a new trial. He also contests the confiscation of 11 billion dollars. At the center of his request, an embarrassing question: what is the notion of loss worth when customers have finally been reimbursed?
In brief
- SBF goes to the Supreme Court to obtain a new trial after his sentence to 25 years in prison and to contest $11 billion confiscated.
- Its defense claims that FTX and Alameda had enough assets to repay customers, ultimately compensated with interest after the bankruptcy proceedings.
- The Kousisis precedent complicates his appeal: the Supreme Court ruled in 2025 that fraud could exist without the intention of causing a net economic loss.
- SBF also contests the evidence presented to the jury: according to its defense, the prosecution could mention the losses while the contrary elements remained excluded from the trial.
FTX refunds its customers, but the crypto paradox remains
This is what SBF’s defense now wants to show to the judges. After the spectacular bankruptcy of FTX in November 2022, the procedure made it possible to reimburse virtually all creditors, with interest.
The detail matters, without telling the whole story. Repayments are based on the dollar value of the claims during bankruptcy. At that time, the price of bitcoin was hovering around $16,000. Those who would have preferred to keep their crypto assets during the market rise therefore do not recover this increase.
Above all, prosecutors reason differently. For them, the subsequent reimbursement does not change anything about the embezzlement alleged against SBF. They accuse him of using billions belonging to FTX clients. The case also concerns $1.7 billion involving FTX investors and $1.3 billion linked to Alameda lenders.
This is why both sides can look at the same reimbursements and tell two different stories. The defense insists on the money ultimately recovered. The prosecution looks at what happened before.
And SBF is still serving his 25 years.
What exactly is the former crypto boss demanding?
His request don’t beat around the bush. SBF wants to overturn his conviction, get a new trial and overturn the $11 billion forfeiture order.
His lawyers criticize the court for having closed part of the debate. According to their motion, the defense was unable to present evidence purporting to demonstrate that FTX and Alameda had enough assets to return the money to customers.
“ There were still more than enough assets available to repay customers, as they have now been, with substantial interest “, states the request.
The 11 billion poses a second problem in his eyes. SBF speaks of a “crushing fine” and invokes the Eighth Amendment, which protects against excessive fines.
The step remains high. The Supreme Court only reviews about 1% of the cases that come to it each year. She still has to decide whether she will accept that of the former crypto billionaire.
Before that, the appeals court had already rejected his arguments in June. And a judgment rendered a year earlier seriously complicated his attempt.
Kousisis: the precedent which hinders his defense of SBF
The case is called Kousisis v. United States. No crypto here, but a public contract obtained with false certifications concerning subcontracting obligations. The work was nevertheless carried out correctly.
In 2025, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously: electronic fraud can exist even when its author does not seek to cause a net economic loss.
The appeals court used this decision to uphold Sam Bankman-Fried’s conviction. His defense is now trying to use the same reasoning in another way.
If the prosecution does not need to demonstrate financial loss to establish fraud, why could it present to the jury evidence suggesting that the customers had lost a lot of money? And why, asks SBF, could its defense not show the elements going in the opposite direction?
Lawyer Jeffrey Fisher considers this presentation “distracting and harmful” when the very existence of the fraud does not depend on an economic loss. It’s much less spectacular than the billions that disappeared from FTX, but legally, the recourse is largely there.
The former boss of the crypto empire is also trying his luck elsewhere. In June, SBF requested a pardon from Donald Trump. The request still appears to be pending with the American administration. The Senate opposed a clemency measure in July, while Trump had already closed that door in January. For the guy who once dominated much of crypto, options are seriously starting to run out.
Maximize your Tremplin.io experience with our ‘Read to Earn’ program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.
