Senator Elizabeth Warren’s authorized crew has dismissed Binance founder Changpeng Zhao’s defamation menace, asserting her tweet about his responsible plea precisely displays the Division of Justice’s (DOJ) description.
This dispute arose after Warren’s October 23 social media publish following Zhao’s presidential pardon reignited debate about crypto regulation and the affect of politics in digital asset markets.
Sponsored
Sponsored
Authorized Protection Rooted in DOJ Language
The official response, issued on November 2, 2025, insists that any lawsuit would face substantial authorized challenges primarily based on public data and constitutional protections.
Warren’s attorneys referred particularly to the DOJ’s November 21, 2023, press launch of their response to Zhao. The DOJ assertion outlined the previous Binance CEO’s expenses as a part of a “$4B resolution” for “anti-money laundering” violations.
CZ pleaded responsible within the US District Court docket for the Western District of Washington (Case No. CR23-179RAJ) for willfully failing to keep up an efficient anti-money laundering program, a legal offense below the Financial institution Secrecy Act.
The authorized letter highlights that Warren’s tweet is each correct and guarded below the regulation. Her assertion, that CZ “pleaded guilty to a criminal money laundering charge and was sentenced to prison,” carefully mirrors the language utilized by federal prosecutors.
CZ pleaded responsible to a legal cash laundering cost and was sentenced to jail.
However then he financed President Trump’s stablecoin and lobbied for a pardon.
Right now, he bought it.
If Congress doesn’t cease this type of corruption, it owns it. pic.twitter.com/NsWeaJcVeK
— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) October 23, 2025
The DOJ described Binance’s violations as “anti-money laundering,” and the Financial institution Secrecy Act stays the important thing regulation for such offenses in america.
Authorized specialists have commented that Zhao’s argument is slender. One lawyer famous that the excellence Zhao attracts is weak.
Sponsored
Sponsored
“It was always the dumbest of technical arguments to suggest that failure to maintain a money laundering program wasn’t a money laundering charge,” stated Max Schatzow in a publish.
The response cites precedents involving public figures in defamation claims. Beneath New York Occasions v. Sullivan and Masson v. New Yorker, public figures should present “actual malice” that the defendant knowingly printed false data or acted recklessly.
Warren’s assertion, grounded in official paperwork and press releases, doesn’t meet these necessities, her crew argues.
Pardon and Political Controversy
The present dispute follows President Trump’s October 22, 2025, pardon of CZ. The authorized letter highlights lobbying efforts and reported enterprise connections between Binance and the Trump household ventures.
Warren launched Senate Decision 466 to sentence the pardon and underline the anti-money laundering violation; it was co-sponsored by 14 senators.
Sponsored
Sponsored
Zhao’s legal actions spanned from August 2017 to October 2022, allegedly prioritising Binance’s development over compliance. The corporate admitted to working an unlicensed cash transmitting enterprise and to violating sanctions.
This resulted in one of many largest legal resolutions involving a company government, with CZ sentenced to jail earlier than the pardon.
The letter clarifies the excellence between civil penalties and legal expenses, noting that CZ expressly admitted to legal conduct below US regulation.
The letter additionally cites the broader regulatory framework. The Financial institution Secrecy Act requires monetary corporations and crypto exchanges to implement anti-money laundering packages. CZ’s failure constituted a legal violation below sections 5318(h) and 5322(b)-(e) of the BSA, in addition to different federal statutes.
Sponsored
Sponsored
Excessive Bar for Defamation Claims
A authorized supply advised Eleanor Terrett that Warren’s protection might make it very tough to convey a defamation case. The supply emphasised the alignment between Warren’s assertion and the DOJ’s public characterization.
As a result of her assertion depends on authorities language and court docket data, will probably be a problem for CZ to show falsity or malice.
Warren’s attorneys additionally referenced constitutional safeguards for speech by senators. As a member of the Senate Banking Committee and a robust advocate for monetary oversight, Warren has each the responsibility and the authority to tell the general public about main enforcement actions. Each her tweet and her Senate decision align together with her legislative tasks.
As this standoff continues, the dispute highlights the continuing rigidity between leaders in crypto and authorities regulators.
Whether or not CZ strikes ahead with a lawsuit stays unclear, however each authorized and political penalties are vital.
The controversy additionally highlights the connection between presidential pardons, company accountability, and the responsibility of elected officers to make sure accountability inside the business.
