Key Highlights
- SBF contrasts Delaware Chancellor McCormick’s decision to reassign Elon Musk’s cases with Judge Kaplan’s refusal to step away from the FTX proceedings.
- He cites Kaplan’s alleged “hostility,” pre-verdict comments, and “juror incentives” (pizza and rides) as grounds for a new trial.
- Judge Kaplan recently ordered SBF to disclose who is actually drafting his “pro se” filings after prosecutors flagged a suspicious FedEx package sent from outside the prison.
Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), the imprisoned founder of collapsed crypto exchange FTX, has posted a new statement on X questioning what he calls a double standard in how U.S. courts handle judicial recusal. In a latest post, he drew a sharp contrast between a Delaware judge’s decision to step aside from Elon Musk-related cases and the continued involvement of SDNY Judge Lewis Kaplan in his own fraud trial.
Bankman-Fried pointed to Delaware Court of Chancery Chancellor Kathaleen St. J. McCormick’s recent announcement that she would reassign three lawsuits involving Elon Musk and his companies. The move came after Musk’s legal team alleged McCormick showed bias by appearing to endorse a LinkedIn post mocking Musk following a separate California civil verdict. McCormick denied any bias but cited disproportionate media attention as the reason for stepping aside.
SBF argued that similar — or stronger — grounds for recusal exist in his own case. He pointed to reports that Judge Lewis Kaplan openly displayed hostility during the 2023 trial, made pre-verdict comments suggesting sufficient evidence of fraud, and allegedly offered jurors pizza and a ride home to speed up deliberations that concluded in under five hours.
SBF also referenced Kaplan’s handling of former President Donald Trump’s E. Jean Carroll defamation case, where bias claims were raised but no recusal occurred.“Judge Kaplan should recuse himself from my case, just as he should have from President Trump’s,” SBF wrote in the post.
Background: The FTX conviction and ongoing appeals
Bankman-Fried was convicted in November 2023 on seven felony counts, including wire fraud and conspiracy, related to the collapse of the FTX cryptocurrency exchange. The collapse left customers, investors, and partners facing billions in losses. He was sentenced to 25 years in prison by Judge Kaplan in March 2024.
Since then, SBF has maintained aspects of his innocence. In appeals and recent pro se filings, he has argued that key evidence was excluded from trial and that the proceedings were fundamentally unfair. His formal appeal remains pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, where judges have previously expressed skepticism toward some defense arguments.
As of early 2026, Bankman-Fried continues to pursue a new trial under Rule 33, raising concerns about Judge Kaplan’s rulings — including alleged limitations on presenting evidence that FTX was solvent or that business decisions were made on legal advice. However, a new hurdle has emerged.
On March 23, 2026, Judge Kaplan ordered Bankman-Fried to reveal under oath who is drafting his legal documents. Prosecutors flagged a letter sent to the court via FedEx from Menlo Park, California, despite SBF being incarcerated in San Pedro. SBF has until April 15 to clarify if he is receiving undisclosed help from attorneys—a move Kaplan says is necessary to ensure “transparency and adherence to court rules.”
Community reactions split
The crypto community remains divided on SBF’s legacy. While many view the FTX saga as a cautionary tale of mismanagement and customer fund misuse during the 2022 bear market, a vocal minority sees his imprisonment as overly harsh and points to broader issues of selective prosecution or judicial bias in high-profile cases.
Bankman-Fried is currently serving a 25-year sentence with a projected release date in the mid-2040s. His formal appeal with the Second Circuit remains pending, though judges there previously expressed skepticism regarding his claims of a “fundamentally unfair” trial.
