Binance Wins Second U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act Case as Alabama Court Dismisses Lawsuit

Key takeawaysBinance secured its second U.S. legal victory under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) within two weeks.A U.S. federal court in Alabama dismissed all claims alleging Binance violated the ATA.The ruling follows a similar decision by a court in the Southern District of New York, which also dismissed ATA claims against Binance.Judges in both cases found the allegations lacked sufficient legal and factual support.Alabama Federal Court Dismisses ATA Claims Against BinanceA U.S. federal court in Alabama has dismissed all claims against Binance in a lawsuit filed under the Anti‑Terrorism Act, marking the exchange’s second major legal victory in the United States in recent weeks.The lawsuit alleged that Binance had violated the ATA through actions related to terrorism financing. However, the court ruled that the complaint failed to meet the required legal standards, effectively dismissing the claims against the crypto exchange.Judge Finds Complaint Legally DeficientIn a 19-page decision, the Alabama judge described the plaintiffs’ filing as a “shotgun pleading,” meaning it lacked clear and specific allegations.According to the ruling:The complaint failed to distinguish between different defendants.Plaintiffs did not provide a clear statement of specific claims or conduct.The case did not meet the required legal threshold for proceeding.The court allowed plaintiffs until April 10, 2026, to file an amended complaint addressing the deficiencies. If the issues are not resolved, the case may be dismissed permanently.Second Court Rejects Similar ClaimsThe decision comes shortly after another major ruling involving Binance.Earlier this month, a federal court in the Southern District of New York dismissed ATA claims brought by 535 plaintiffs who alleged the exchange provided material support linked to 64 terrorist attacks.In that 62-page ruling, the court concluded that the plaintiffs failed to establish any evidence that Binance:Assisted terroristsParticipated in or supported terrorist attacksConspired with terrorist organizationsTogether, the two rulings reinforce that courts reviewing these allegations found them insufficient on both legal and factual grounds.Binance Responds to the RulingsBinance General Counsel Eleanor Hughes said the decisions highlight the importance of due process in cases involving serious allegations.She stated that terrorism financing and sanctions compliance claims require clear evidence and legal rigor, adding that the court outcomes demonstrate that the accusations lacked merit.Compliance Remains Key Focus for BinanceBinance said it will continue investing in compliance infrastructure, regulatory cooperation, and legal governance.The exchange noted that the rulings underscore the importance of fact-based scrutiny in cases involving financial crime and sanctions compliance, particularly within the rapidly evolving cryptocurrency industry.