What’s the Case for Supreme Court Review of Sam Bankman-Fried’s Conviction?
Ecosystem
English
News
Markets
Features
Research
Opinion
Podcasts
Newsletters
Commissioned
About
Cryptocurrencies:
- DOGE: $0.08005 (5.50%)
- TRX: $0.3323 (0.15%)
- LINK: $12.08 (6.32%)
- ZEC: $1,099.75 (11.98%)
- ADA: $0.2207 (6.20%)
- XRP: $1.30 (4.90%)
- ETH: $2,372.66 (5.38%)
- BTC: $81,297.12 (2.61%)
- XMR: $542.52 (1.53%)
- BNB: $719.56 (3.02%)
- XLM: $0.1797 (5.37%)
- SOL: $102.59 (4.43%)
- HYPE: $79.97 (2.35%)
Sam Bankman-Fried’s Conviction and Supreme Court Appeal
Written by Turner Wright staff writer
Edited by Robert Lakin staff editor
Sam Bankman-Fried’s lawyer, Jeffrey Fisher, of Hecker Fink LLP, outlines the former FTX CEO's Supreme Court case.
Latest News
Published October 14, 2026
After a 2023 conviction, a 2026 appeal loss to the Second Circuit court, and a pending presidential pardon request that may not materialize, Sam "SBF" Bankman-Fried is pushing for his criminal case to be heard by the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS).
Potential Timeline and Expectations
Fisher explains that SCOTUS rules require a petition for a writ of certiorari to be filed within 90 days of an appellate court decision, which the US government initially had until October 15, but was extended to November 16.
If SCOTUS accepts the petition, a decision could come as early as June 2027, ending the current term, or during the next term beginning a year from now.
Key Arguments for SCOTUS Review
Bankman-Fried's petition focuses on two main points:
- Lower courts weighed "evidence indicating victims lost money" without considering prejudice to the defendant.
- The $11 billion forfeiture order following his conviction violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on "excessive fines."
Fisher notes that the Supreme Court has historically expressed concern about prosecutorial overreach in criminal fraud prosecutions, making these arguments relevant.
Concluding Thoughts
The case raises questions about the admissibility of evidence and the proportionality of the forfeiture order. Ultimately, Fisher emphasizes the importance of a fair trial and the potential impact on future criminal fraud prosecutions.