SEC To Dismiss 3-Year Lawsuit Against Gemini – Details

bitcoinistPublished on 2026-01-25Last updated on 2026-01-25

Abstract

In a major development, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has moved to dismiss its three-year lawsuit against Gemini Trust Company with prejudice, effectively ending the legal battle over the Gemini Earn crypto lending program. The SEC had accused Gemini and Genesis Global Capital of illegally offering unregistered securities through the program, which allowed users to earn interest on crypto loans. Following Genesis's bankruptcy and the FTX collapse, all affected investors fully recovered their assets. Gemini also settled with other regulators, paying over $50 million in fines. The SEC cited these recoveries and settlements in its decision to dismiss the case permanently. This dismissal occurs amid a broader shift in US crypto regulation, including the passage of the pro-crypto GENIUS Act and ongoing legislative efforts like the Clarity Act to define digital asset oversight.

In a major development, the US Securities and Exchange Commission has filed a joint stipulation with defendant Gemini Trust Company, LLC to terminate its long-running civil enforcement action with prejudice, effectively ending the three-year legal battle over the Gemini Earn crypto lending program.

SEC Vs Gemini

In January 2023, the SEC instituted one of the most controversial crypto-related lawsuits against Gemini Trust Company and its partner, Genesis Global Capital LLC, accusing both parties of illegally offering and selling unregistered securities through the Gemini Earn lending program, a financial product that operated between 2021 and 2022, which allowed customers to lend crypto for interest at 7.4% per annum.

Following the FTX crash in 2022, Genesis, which had a significant financial exposure to the now-defunct crypto exchange, halted withdrawals on the Gemini Earn Program, effectively locking up $940 million in investor assets. Since then, a series of events has unfolded, including Genesis entering bankruptcy proceedings, and through that process, all Earn investors ultimately recovered 100 percent of their crypto assets in kind. In addition, Gemini has settled related matters with state and federal regulators, paying over $50 million in civil fines.

In the joint stipulation filed this week, the SEC noted that its decision to seek dismissal “in the exercise of its discretion” took into account the full investor recovery and those regulatory settlements. The dismissal is with prejudice, preventing the SEC from re-filing the same claims, and represents the formal end of one of the most high-profile enforcement actions in the US crypto industry.

US Crypto Regulatory Turnaround

The dismissal of the Gemini case comes amid a broader recalibration of the US crypto regulatory approach under the Donald Trump administration. Several high-profile SEC actions against major platforms, involving Coinbase, Kraken, and Binance, have been dropped or paused, reflecting a shift from a forceful regulatory approach seen under the former chairman, Gary Gensler.

At the same time, Congress and the White House continue to pursue pro-crypto legislative and policy initiatives. In July 2025, US President Donald Trump signed the GENIUS Act into law, a landmark bill establishing a comprehensive federal framework for stablecoins, aimed at boosting consumer protection and supporting broader adoption of digital assets.

Alongside the GENIUS Act, the highly anticipated Clarity Act, passed by the US House, aims to delineate regulatory responsibilities between agencies like the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) based on how digital assets function. The US Senate Agriculture Committee is set to observe a markup session of the bill on January 27, indicating steady progress despite recent concerning events, including public outrage by Coinbase founder Brian Armstrong and the Banking Committee’s continued postponement of its own hearing session.

Total crypto market cap valued at $2.97 trillion on the daily chart | Source: TOTAL chart on Tradingview.com

When Doing Cryptocurrency Payment, the First Thing is Licenses, What is the Second?

When launching a crypto payment business, obtaining the necessary licenses is the crucial first step. However, the second, and arguably more critical, step is designing a comprehensive operational framework that forms a coherent business loop. This loop must be clearly understood and executable by all stakeholders: banks, payment partners, exchanges, on-chain analytics providers, regulators, and your internal team. Many projects mistakenly believe a single license permits all operations. Licenses merely grant entry; they don't define how the specific business functions. The real challenge lies in detailing every aspect of the workflow. This involves clarifying the customer base, the flow of fiat and crypto assets, the settlement process, and establishing clear lines of responsibility for risks like AML compliance, sanctions screening, chargebacks, and regulatory inquiries. A robust framework must answer seven core questions: Who are the clients and merchants? Who collects fiat and crypto? Who handles conversion and custody? And who is ultimately accountable for compliance and risk management? Projects often fail not from a lack of licensing, but during due diligence when they cannot convincingly explain these operational details. Therefore, beyond securing licenses, the priority must be constructing a closed-loop system. This system ensures the business model is transparent, risks are managed, responsibilities are delineated, contracts are aligned, and the entire process is comprehensible to partners and regulators. The true competitive edge in crypto payments lies not in acquiring a license quickly, but in integrating licensing, banking, compliance, and operations into a sustainable and executable whole.

marsbit22m ago

When Doing Cryptocurrency Payment, the First Thing is Licenses, What is the Second?

marsbit22m ago

Arthur Hayes Analysis: AI Bubble Nears Burst, Crypto Market Faces Short-Term Pressure

Arthur Hayes argues that the current AI market is a bubble poised to burst, which will exert downward pressure on the crypto market in the near term. The core trigger is rising oil prices due to the US-Iran conflict and a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Higher energy costs directly increase the operational expenses of AI data centers, squeezing profit margins for companies like Google, Anthropic, and OpenAI. Hayes predicts that persistent inflation from high oil prices will force Trump, in a bid to win the November election, to turn public sentiment against the AI industry. He may propose regulations and taxes on data centers and AI companies to appeal to voters concerned about costs and job displacement. Such political rhetoric could shatter market confidence. Furthermore, the market is unlikely to healthily absorb the massive concurrent IPOs of SpaceX, Anthropic, and OpenAI, which together seek valuations in the trillions. The combination of soaring energy costs, overwhelming equity supply, and negative political pressure will puncture the AI bubble. Hayes notes that nearly all new USD liquidity since 2022 has flowed into AI, leaving crypto like Bitcoin behind. When the AI bubble bursts, liquidity will contract sharply, pulling down all risk assets, including cryptocurrencies. In response, Hayes's fund, Maelstrom, has sold all AI-related stocks and non-core cryptocurrencies. It maintains core positions in Bitcoin and Ethereum while increasing exposure to energy sector equities, betting on rising oil and gas prices. He expects Bitcoin to bottom after the AI-led market decline, before rallying again with future monetary easing.

Foresight News36m ago

Arthur Hayes Analysis: AI Bubble Nears Burst, Crypto Market Faces Short-Term Pressure

Foresight News36m ago

To C, To B, and the Next Big Thing Called To A

After To C and To B, the Next Wave is To A: Serving AI Agents In a recent quarterly earnings call, Meituan's Wang Xing introduced a new concept: To A (To Agent), signifying that future business services will increasingly target AI Agents as primary clients, not just consumers or merchants. This shift implies that internet giants must now consider how to make their services more appealing for AI Agents to recommend, fundamentally altering traditional distribution logic. This "To A era" is prompting an unusual trend of alliances among major tech companies. Unlike previous competitive battles, firms like Meituan, Tencent, JD.com, Huawei, OPPO, and OpenAI are rapidly forming partnerships. The reason is strategic: as AI Agents become the primary user interface, handling tasks from a single command (e.g., "Book a Japanese restaurant for tomorrow"), the risk for platforms is being bypassed entirely. Companies are positioning themselves within this new value chain. Three primary strategies are emerging: 1. **Super-Entry Points + Service Providers:** Platforms like Tencent's Yuanbao, WeChat, and ChatGPT aim to be the first-stop Agent, integrating various services (food delivery, shopping, travel) from partners like Meituan and JD.com. 2. **Apps as Callable Services:** Companies like Meituan, JD.com, and Uber are ensuring their core services remain accessible and callable by external Agents, shifting from front-end apps to back-end capabilities. 3. **System-Level Agent Entry Points:** Smartphone makers (Huawei, Honor, OPPO) are leveraging their OS-level AI assistants to control the initial user command, redistributing it to relevant service apps. While alliances offer mutual benefit—entry points gain service capabilities, and service providers gain traffic—inherent conflicts of interest exist. A dominant Agent platform could eventually attempt to connect directly with suppliers (restaurants, hotels), bypassing current aggregators like Meituan or Ctrip. Other unresolved challenges include the potential for Agent recommendations to become a new form of paid ranking and unclear accountability for faulty recommendations. The current rush to form alliances is a defensive move by service providers to secure their position before the landscape solidifies. In this To A-driven restructuring, the greatest risk is not losing the race but failing to hear the starting gun.

marsbit44m ago

To C, To B, and the Next Big Thing Called To A

marsbit44m ago

The More Lifelike the Robot, the More Terrifying? Unveiling the 'Uncanny Valley Effect' in the Era of Humanoid Robots

As humanoid robots become increasingly lifelike, they confront a significant psychological barrier known as the "Uncanny Valley Effect," a concept proposed by Japanese roboticist Masahiro Mori in 1970. This phenomenon describes a dip in human comfort and acceptance when robots appear almost, but not perfectly, human. Minor imperfections in facial expressions, eye movements, or skin texture trigger a subconscious sense of unease, as the brain detects something trying, yet failing, to mimic a person. Examples range from the controversial human-like robot Sophia to animated characters in films like *The Polar Express*. The effect poses a key design challenge for robotics companies. Some, like Boston Dynamics, avoid it entirely by creating highly capable but visibly mechanical robots. Others, like Hanson Robotics, push for greater human likeness despite the risk. For consumer robots, especially in homes, most manufacturers opt for stylized or clearly mechanical designs to ensure broader acceptance. While the Uncanny Valley remains a powerful force, its impact may diminish over time through technological advancements that achieve near-perfect realism or through generational familiarity as people grow accustomed to interacting with humanoid machines. Ultimately, navigating this psychological frontier requires as much understanding of human perception as of robotics technology itself.

marsbit45m ago

The More Lifelike the Robot, the More Terrifying? Unveiling the 'Uncanny Valley Effect' in the Era of Humanoid Robots

marsbit45m ago

Over $31 Million Stolen from Humanity, Is the Team Behind It Paving the Way for a New Project?

The article reports a major security incident involving Humanity Protocol (H), resulting in over $31 million stolen. The team attributes the hack to a private key leak from a Humanity Foundation member, leading to a rapid sale of H tokens and a 90% price drop. However, prominent on-chain investigator ZachXBT suggests the event might be an "exit scam" orchestrated by the team, rather than an external hack. This suspicion is fueled by the team's controversial history, including past management failures, legal issues, and previous scandals like outsourced technology and problematic airdrops. Further investigation reveals that the core team behind Humanity is already involved with a new project called "Everything," which recently secured funding. This has led to community speculation that the alleged hack is a deliberate scheme to abandon the H project while shifting focus and resources to their new venture, leaving investors to bear the losses. The article questions whether this is a genuine security failure or a premeditated "rug pull" strategy.

Odaily星球日报1h ago

Over $31 Million Stolen from Humanity, Is the Team Behind It Paving the Way for a New Project?

Odaily星球日报1h ago

Trading

Spot

Futures