Former Binance CEO CZ Argues Centralized Exchanges Have "Zero Motive" to Aid Terrorists Following Lawsuit Dismissal

Changpeng Zhao, the former CEO of Binance, has asserted that centralized cryptocurrency exchanges have "zero motive" to assist terrorist organizations, a statement made in the wake of a United States court dismissing a significant lawsuit that accused the exchange of facilitating terrorist financing. Zhao’s remarks, shared on the social media platform X, emphasized the economic disincentives for exchanges to engage in such activities, suggesting that terrorist actors are unlikely to generate trading revenue and would likely only deposit funds briefly before withdrawing them.

The dismissal of the lawsuit by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York came after hundreds of victims and their relatives brought claims against Binance, Zhao, and BAM Trading Services, the operator of Binance.US. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants aided terrorist groups in moving funds through cryptocurrency transactions. The lawsuit encompassed victims from 64 attacks carried out between 2016 and 2024, attributed to groups including Hezbollah, Hamas, ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

The plaintiffs sought damages under the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act and the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, legislation that permits victims to pursue claims against entities accused of supporting terrorist acts. Their argument centered on the assertion that attackers or affiliated organizations benefited from transactions conducted on the Binance exchange.

However, Judge Jeannette A. Vargas dismissed the case, ruling that the complaint failed to establish a sufficient nexus between Binance’s operations and the specific terrorist attacks that caused the plaintiffs’ injuries. While the court acknowledged allegations of compliance failures and illicit activity on the platform, it found that the plaintiffs had not plausibly linked the exchange’s conduct to the incidents themselves. This decision effectively ended the case at the pleading stage, although the judge noted that any amended complaint would be due within 60 days.

Zhao’s commentary on X directly addressed the court’s ruling, stating, "There are absolutely zero (0) motive for any CEX to have anything to do with terrorists." He elaborated on the economic rationale, explaining that the business model of centralized exchanges relies on trading volume and fees, which are not generated by clandestine or terrorist-related activities. Such actors, he implied, would not be long-term users who contribute to the exchange’s revenue streams.

This legal victory for Binance occurs at a time when the cryptocurrency giant faces increased scrutiny regarding transactions linked to sanctioned entities. Just days prior, Binance pushed back against allegations raised by a group of 11 U.S. senators, vehemently denying claims that it facilitated transactions connected to Iranian entities.

In a letter addressed to Senators Richard Blumenthal and Ron Johnson, Binance refuted the February inquiry’s reliance on what it described as "demonstrably false" reports lacking credible evidence. This renewed scrutiny followed media reports alleging that Binance processed over $1 billion in crypto transactions linked to Iranian entities Hexa Whale and Blessed Trust and that it had terminated employees who flagged these concerns internally.

Binance has consistently maintained its commitment to compliance and has asserted that it cooperates with law enforcement and regulatory bodies. The exchange has highlighted its efforts to implement robust anti-money laundering (AML) and know-your-customer (KYC) procedures to prevent illicit activities on its platform. However, the ongoing investigations and lawsuits underscore the complex regulatory landscape in which cryptocurrency exchanges operate and the persistent challenges in combating financial crime.

The dismissal of the terrorist financing lawsuit represents a significant reprieve for Binance and its former CEO, reinforcing their defense against accusations of facilitating such activities. Nevertheless, the broader context of regulatory pressure and scrutiny over transactions involving sanctioned countries and potentially illicit actors suggests that Binance and other major exchanges will continue to face intense oversight. The company’s response to the U.S. senators’ inquiry further illustrates its proactive stance in defending its reputation and operational integrity against what it deems unsubstantiated claims.

The legal proceedings, while ultimately dismissed at this stage, brought to light the intricate nature of tracing and preventing the flow of funds through digital assets. The plaintiffs’ attempt to hold Binance accountable for the actions of terrorist groups highlights the ongoing debate about the responsibilities of centralized platforms in a global financial system increasingly reliant on digital technologies. The court’s decision, however, placed the onus on the plaintiffs to demonstrate a direct and plausible link between the exchange’s actions and the specific acts of terrorism, a standard that was not met in this instance.

Cointelegraph, as a news organization, is committed to independent and transparent journalism. This report is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy, aiming to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently and refer to the editorial policy for further details on journalistic standards. The information presented here is based on publicly available court documents and statements from the involved parties.