Binance Secures Second U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act Court Victory in Two Weeks

Binance has secured its second major legal victory in the United States under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) in just two weeks.

A U.S. federal court in Alabama has dismissed all claims against Binance in a lawsuit alleging violations of the ATA. The decision follows closely on the heels of Binance’s recent victory in the Southern District of New York, where a federal court likewise dismissed all claims against the company in a separate ATA case.

Taken together, the two rulings mark an important legal moment for Binance. They show that courts reviewing these claims have found them wanting on both the facts and the law, and they reinforce that allegations involving sanctions compliance and terrorism financing are serious matters that must be backed by evidence rather than rhetoric and speculation.

A Full and Complete Legal Victory

In a detailed 19-page ruling, the Alabama court found the plaintiffs’ complaint to be legally and factually deficient and dismissed all claims against Binance.

The judge described the filing as a “shotgun pleading,” finding that it failed to clearly specify the claims and improperly grouped all defendants together without distinguishing individual conduct or liability. The ruling also emphasized that the plaintiffs did not meet the basic pleading standard to provide a “short and plain statement” of their claims.

The court granted the plaintiffs until April 10, 2026, to file an amended complaint addressing the deficiencies identified. At the same time, the judge warned that failure to adequately address those issues would result in dismissal of the entire case.

Building on Binance’s Earlier New York Victory

This latest outcome builds on Binance’s comprehensive victory in New York earlier this month.

In that case, a U.S. federal court in the Southern District of New York dismissed all ATA claims brought against Binance by 535 plaintiffs who alleged that the company had provided material support related to 64 terrorist attacks. In a 62-page decision, the court found that the plaintiffs had failed to establish any of their central allegations, including claims that Binance assisted terrorists, associated itself with terrorist attacks, participated in or sought to advance those attacks, or engaged in any conspiracy with terrorist organizations.

Together, the New York and Alabama decisions underscore that courts have now examined similar accusations against Binance on two separate occasions and found them insufficient.

Upholding Legal Integrity

Eleanor Hughes, Binance’s General Counsel, said: “Sanctions compliance and terrorism financing are serious matters of law: they require evidence, legal rigour, and due process. Courts have now examined these claims on two separate occasions and found them to be without merit. These outcomes speak for themselves. We will not tolerate attempts to misuse the legal system to target our industry, and we remain as committed as ever to transparency, security, and lawful conduct in everything we do.”

The earlier New York ruling also prompted a strong response from Hughes. “This dismissal is a complete vindication of all false allegations,” she said at the time. “The court has unambiguously rejected the false and damaging narrative that Binance assisted terrorists. We have always maintained that these claims were without merit, and today’s ruling confirms that.”

She added that Binance will continue to defend itself aggressively against any litigation or reporting that misrepresents who we are and how we operate.

Continuing to Invest in Compliance and Governance

Binance has consistently invested in industry-leading compliance infrastructure, regulatory engagement, and legal governance. We will continue to vigorously defend itself against attempts to bring unfounded claims or misrepresent our operations.

Beyond being important legal wins for Binance, these two rulings also reaffirm the importance of due process and factual scrutiny in an industry where serious issues like terrorism financing and sanctions compliance demand precision and integrity.

ENDS