A federal court in Alabama has dismissed all claims in a lawsuit accusing Binance of violating anti-terrorism laws. The decision marks the second time within a week that a US court has cleared the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange of similar allegations. Binance, which consistently ranks among the highest-volume crypto trading platforms globally, has faced tightening legal and regulatory scrutiny across multiple jurisdictions for several years.
Back-to-Back Dismissals in Alabama and New York
US District Judge Chad W. Bryan, who presided over the Alabama case, published a 19-page ruling describing the plaintiffs’ arguments as “shotgun pleading”—a term used when a lawsuit fails to specify the connections between defendants and individual allegations, leaving the complaints vague and disorganized. The court criticized this lack of clarity, emphasizing that the accusers failed to provide concrete evidence linking Binance’s conduct to any specific terror attack. Plaintiffs now have until April 10, 2026, to amend their complaint and address the court’s concerns if they wish to proceed.
Parallel Outcome in New York Proceedings
Alabama’s decision is not an isolated one. In a similar case heard on March 6 in the Southern District of New York, a group of 535 plaintiffs accused Binance of providing financial support to 64 separate terror attacks. However, the court dismissed the claims, citing a lack of substantiated connections between Binance and alleged terror groups or incidents. While both courts ruled independently, the underlying reasons for dismissal in both jurisdictions have significant overlap.
Binance Legal Team Welcomes Dismissals
Eleanor Hughes, Binance’s Chief Legal Officer, commented on the consecutive court rejections, highlighting that these rulings strongly reinforce the company’s position. Hughes noted that the courts were unequivocal in their rejection of the accusations that Binance was aiding terrorist organizations, and described the consistency in the decisions as a reflection of the cases’ fundamental legal shortcomings rather than mere coincidence.
Court decisions have clearly rejected claims that Binance is linked to terrorist groups, Hughes emphasized.
This strong stance from Hughes signals Binance’s confidence as US judges from different states reach parallel conclusions. The legal chief pointed to a pattern emerging across jurisdictions, suggesting a consensus on the merits of the allegations against Binance.
Continuing Developments and Legal Implications
The legal process in Alabama is not entirely over. The plaintiffs have been granted the opportunity to resubmit their complaint by April 2026 if they can address the deficiencies identified by the court. Meanwhile, following the March ruling in New York, it remains unclear whether a similar opportunity for amendment will be extended, though reopening the case is a possibility.
These two decisions have temporarily eased some of the legal pressure on Binance, at least as far as lawsuits under anti-terrorism statutes are concerned. Nonetheless, regulatory challenges continue to loom for the company. Notably, the compliance agreement Binance reached with US watchdogs in 2023 in relation to anti-money laundering requirements remains a pivotal aspect of Binance’s standing in Washington. The recent dismissals only close the door on this specific line of anti-terror litigation, rather than ending Binance’s broader legal challenges.
