Bankman-Fried asks Supreme Court to overturn fraud conviction, $11 billion forfeiture

Sam Bankman-Fried has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn his fraud conviction and an $11 billion forfeiture order, arguing that his trial improperly prevented him from presenting evidence that FTX and Alameda Research had sufficient assets to repay customers and investors. The petition, filed by the former FTX chief as he serves a 25-year prison sentence, comes after a federal appeals court upheld the fraud conviction in June.

Bankman-Fried, who co-founded and led the now-defunct cryptocurrency exchange FTX, was convicted by a jury on seven counts involving fraud, conspiracy and money laundering. Prosecutors accused him of orchestrating a multibillion-dollar scheme to misappropriate customer funds and defraud investors and lenders.

His latest appeal challenges both the handling of evidence at trial and the constitutionality of the $11 billion forfeiture. The Supreme Court is expected to decide later this year whether it will hear the case.

Bankman-Fried challenges fraud conviction

At the center of Bankman-Fried’s petition is his argument that the trial court restricted the defense from presenting evidence about FTX’s overall financial position.

His lawyers contend that FTX and Alameda were temporarily unable to meet obligations but ultimately had enough assets to make customers and investors whole. The petition argues that the defense should have been permitted to demonstrate that financial position to the jury.

“FTX and Alameda, while temporarily illiquid, held sufficient assets to ultimately make investors and customers whole,” Bankman-Fried’s legal team argued in the petition.

The filing goes further, maintaining that the evidence was particularly important because prosecutors were permitted to emphasize substantial customer losses while the defense was prevented from showing that customers were ultimately repaid.

“There were always more than enough assets available to repay customers (as they now have been repaid, with substantial interest),” the petition states.

Bankman-Fried’s lawyers argue that restricting this evidence affected the fairness of the proceedings and warrants a new trial. Their position forms the central basis of the request to overturn the fraud conviction.

Supreme Court precedent shapes appeal

The Supreme Court petition follows a June ruling from a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which affirmed Bankman-Fried’s fraud conviction.

The appeals court relied in part on the Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in Kousisis v. United States. That ruling held that conduct can constitute wire fraud even when prosecutors do not need to establish an intent to cause net economic harm.

The decision weakened Bankman-Fried’s argument that the absence of permanent economic losses should undermine his conviction. His legal team is now asking the Supreme Court to clarify when evidence concerning actual losses can be admitted in cases prosecuted under a “fraudulent inducement” theory.

The petition asks: “In a prosecution under the ‘fraudulent inducement’ theory of fraud—under which it is irrelevant whether victims suffered any financial losses when, if ever, may the trial court admit evidence indicating whether victims suffered such losses?”

That question directly challenges how the lower courts treated evidence concerning FTX customers and the company’s eventual ability to repay them. It also represents Bankman-Fried’s latest effort to overturn the fraud conviction following the collapse of FTX.

$11 billion forfeiture also challenged

Bankman-Fried’s Supreme Court petition is not limited to the fraud conviction itself. His lawyers are also challenging the government’s $11 billion forfeiture order.

The petition argues that the forfeiture violates the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits excessive fines. The legal challenge therefore places both the underlying conviction and the financial penalties imposed following the FTX case before the Supreme Court.

The forfeiture dispute adds another significant issue to Bankman-Fried’s appeal as he continues serving his 25-year sentence. Any decision by the Supreme Court to take up the case could potentially address both the treatment of evidence at trial and the scope of the financial penalty.

For now, however, the existing fraud conviction remains in place following the Second Circuit’s June decision.

Supreme Court decision could determine next step

The Supreme Court must first decide whether to hear Bankman-Fried’s case. According to CNN, the justices are expected to make that decision later this year.

If the court declines to intervene, the fraud conviction and the $11 billion forfeiture will remain intact, leaving Bankman-Fried to continue serving his sentence. If the justices agree to hear the appeal, the case could raise broader questions about the evidence courts may consider in fraudulent-inducement prosecutions, particularly where the defense argues that victims were ultimately made whole.

Bankman-Fried’s petition maintains that the trial’s treatment of evidence created an imbalance: prosecutors were able to present allegations of large customer losses, while the defense was allegedly prevented from presenting evidence concerning repayment and FTX’s underlying assets.

The Supreme Court’s eventual decision on whether to hear the case will therefore determine whether Bankman-Fried receives another opportunity to challenge his fraud conviction in the federal courts.

The case also keeps the legal fallout from FTX’s collapse before the nation’s highest court. While the Second Circuit has already rejected Bankman-Fried’s bid for a new trial, his latest petition argues that important questions about the interpretation of fraud law and the admission of loss-related evidence remain unresolved.

For Bankman-Fried, the Supreme Court filing represents another attempt to reverse the fraud conviction that resulted in his 25-year prison sentence and to challenge the $11 billion forfeiture imposed after the collapse of FTX.