TLDR
- Sam Bankman-Fried has filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking a new trial
- He is serving a 25-year sentence after being convicted on seven counts of fraud, conspiracy, and money laundering
- His lawyers argue he was blocked from showing FTX had enough assets to cover customer losses
- He claims the $11 billion forfeiture order violates the 8th Amendment’s ban on excessive fines
- The Supreme Court is expected to decide whether to hear the case later this year
Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of collapsed crypto exchange FTX, has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn his fraud conviction and throw out an $11 billion forfeiture order.
🚨BREAKING: Sam Bankman-Fried is taking his $8 BILLION fraud case to the US Supreme Court.
He filed the petition today in a last-ditch attempt to overturn his 25-year sentence, per Bloomberg Law.
A federal appeals court unanimously upheld the conviction in June, calling the… pic.twitter.com/o5znzihlU1
— Coin Bureau (@coinbureau) September 10, 2026
Bankman-Fried is currently serving a 25-year prison sentence. A jury convicted him in 2023 on seven counts of fraud, conspiracy, and money laundering. Prosecutors said he moved billions of dollars in customer funds from FTX to his hedge fund, Alameda Research.
Those funds were used for risky investments, political donations, and personal spending.
The Argument at the Center of the Appeal
His legal team argues that the trial court made a key error. They say the judge blocked Bankman-Fried from presenting evidence that FTX and Alameda held enough assets to repay customers, even if the exchange was temporarily unable to access them.
His lawyers point out that FTX customers have since been repaid in full, with interest. They argue it was unfair for prosecutors to suggest customers lost money while the defense was barred from showing they did not.
Supreme Court attorney Jeffrey Fisher, representing Bankman-Fried, said that where fraud charges do not require proof of financial loss, allowing evidence of loss is “distracting and prejudicial.”
The appeal also challenges the $11 billion forfeiture, arguing it violates the 8th Amendment’s prohibition on excessive fines.
How a Recent Supreme Court Ruling Shapes the Case
The case rests heavily on a 2025 Supreme Court decision called Kousisis v. United States. In that case, the court ruled unanimously that wire fraud does not require prosecutors to prove that victims suffered economic harm.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals used that ruling to uphold Bankman-Fried’s conviction earlier this year.
But Bankman-Fried’s petition raises a narrower question. If economic loss does not need to be proven to secure a fraud conviction, then why should prosecutors be allowed to introduce evidence suggesting victims lost money in the first place?
His team argues that if such evidence is allowed in, defendants must be permitted to present evidence showing the opposite.
The Supreme Court is expected to decide later this year whether it will hear the case. If the court agrees to take it, the case could revisit how fraud evidence rules are applied in federal trials.
Bankman-Fried was sentenced in March 2024. He has been held at a federal facility while his appeals move through the courts.
