CZ Says Crypto Exchanges Have “Zero Motive” to Help Terrorists After Binance Court Win

TLDR

• A US federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by 535 terrorism victims against Binance, founder CZ, and Binance.US
• Plaintiffs failed to prove a direct link between Binance’s conduct and the specific attacks that harmed them
• The court acknowledged Binance was likely “generally aware” of terrorist financing on its platform
• The judge granted plaintiffs 60 days to file an amended complaint with more specific allegations
• Binance called the ruling “a complete vindication,” while two related lawsuits remain active

A federal judge in Manhattan dismissed all claims in a major Anti-Terrorism Act lawsuit against Binance on Friday. The case was brought by 535 victims and relatives of victims of 64 terrorist attacks.

The lawsuit named Binance, its founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, and Binance.US operator BAM Trading Services as defendants. Plaintiffs alleged the exchange helped terrorist groups move funds through cryptocurrency.

The attacks in question took place between 2016 and 2024. Groups named in the suit included Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

Judge Jeannette A. Vargas of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York issued the ruling. Her written opinion ran 62 pages.

The court found that Binance was “generally aware” its platform was used for terrorist financing. It cited Binance’s history of anti-money laundering violations, its service of sanctioned Iranian users, and internal communications showing executives knew terrorists transacted on the platform.

However, general awareness was not enough. The court said plaintiffs needed to show “knowing and substantial assistance” with a direct link to the specific attacks that caused their injuries. The complaint did not meet that standard.

What the Court Found on Hamas and Iran Transactions

The filing described roughly $56 million in Hamas-linked transfers and $59 million in Palestinian Islamic Jihad-linked transfers through Binance. The court called this portion of the case “a closer call.”

Binance had also admitted internally that it knew Hamas was transacting on the platform as early as 2019. Despite this, the court found the plaintiffs’ theory relied too heavily on fungibility — the idea that because Binance facilitated broad illicit transactions, some funds must have reached the attackers.

The ruling applied a 2025 Second Circuit decision in Ashley v. Deutsche Bank. That ruling raised the legal bar for terrorism financing claims against financial institutions.

Judge Vargas noted that a separate case, Raanan v. Binance, had survived a motion to dismiss in February 2025 on similar allegations. But that case was decided before the Ashley ruling, which she said now requires a different outcome.

Binance’s Response and Ongoing Scrutiny

Zhao pleaded guilty to federal anti-money laundering and sanctions charges in November 2023 and was later pardoned by President Trump.

The judge granted plaintiffs 60 days to file an amended complaint. She said deficiencies could be fixed with more specific details about wallet ownership, transaction timing, and links between account holders and the attacks.

Two related cases remain active: the Raanan lawsuit filed by October 7 survivors, and a third suit filed in North Dakota in November 2025.

Separately, Binance is also pushing back against allegations from 11 US senators that it processed over $1 billion in transactions tied to Iranian entities.

The post CZ Says Crypto Exchanges Have “Zero Motive” to Help Terrorists After Binance Court Win appeared first on CoinCentral.