Sam Bankman-Fried Seeks Supreme Court Review of $11 Billion Forfeiture Order

Former cryptocurrency exchange founder Sam Bankman-Fried, convicted in 2024 of defrauding investors by diverting billions from FTX to his hedge fund Alameda Research, has asked the United States Supreme Court to grant a new trial and vacate the $11 billion forfeiture component of his sentence. The petition, filed on a Thursday, argues that the forfeiture violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on excessive fines and raises a procedural question about whether evidence of the soundness of his investments should have been allowed at trial.

CNN

Bankman-Fried’s conviction rested on prosecutors’ claim that he used FTX customer funds for risky trades, political donations, and personal expenses. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected his arguments earlier this year. The Supreme Court’s review will hinge on a 2025 decision involving a Department of Transportation contractor that was allowed to avoid wire-fraud liability despite completing work, because the government could not prove economic loss. That ruling affirmed that fraud charges can proceed without demonstrating victim loss, a principle the defense seeks to extend to Bankman-Fried’s case.

CNN

Attorney Jeffrey Fisher, a veteran Supreme Court practitioner, contends that the government’s fraud theory renders evidence of victim losses irrelevant and prejudicial. He maintains that if prosecutors need not show economic harm to secure fraud convictions, then defendants should be permitted to introduce evidence showing that any losses were offset by subsequent investment gains.

CNN

Prosecutors maintain that Bankman-Fried’s diversion of funds caused substantial harm to FTX customers and that the forfeiture reflects the scale of the misconduct. The earlier appellate ruling upheld the forfeiture, and the Supreme Court’s 2025 precedent on the contractor case was applied to reject the contractor’s appeal, reinforcing the view that intent to cause economic harm is not required for fraud convictions.

CNN

If the Supreme Court grants relief, the $11 billion forfeiture could be reduced or eliminated, potentially reshaping the financial penalties imposed in high-profile fraud cases. A denial would affirm the current approach, signaling that courts may continue to admit evidence of victim losses even when fraud statutes do not require proof of economic damage. The Court is expected to consider the petition later this year.

CNN