Binance.US Fights SEC’s Restraining Order Request: Draconian and Unduly Burdensome

• The SEC recently filed a civil enforcement action against Binance.US, but the crypto exchange has now hit back with a rebuttal.
• Binance argued that the SEC’s request for a restraining order would have “destructive consequences” and hinder its ability to defend itself in this litigation.
• Binance further claimed that the SEC has not identified any security trading on its platform and it would primarily hurt BAM’s customers if such an order is granted.

SEC Filed Civil Enforcement Action Against Binance.US

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently filed a civil enforcement action against crypto exchange, Binance.US, also known as BAM Trading.

Binance Rebuttal Against the Motion

In response to the motion, Binance argued that such an action would have “destructive consequences” which will subsequently affect the platform’s ability to even fund its defense to this action. The crypto exchange said that all of the regulator’s claims are invalid and claimed that the SEC has not identified any security trading on its platform, which means granting their request for restraining order would primarily hurt BAM’s customers.

Consequences of Restraining Order

Binance warned that such an order would hinder its ability to pay employees, vendors, suppliers, and professionals in the ordinary course of business as well as maintain its technology platform. It further noted that numerous cryptocurrency exchanges have operated in the US for years without interference by the SEC; hence there is no evidence to suggest they are clearly violating federal securities laws or regulations.

Argument on Cryptocurrency Being Security

The company contested that cryptocurrency is not necessarily considered as security and stated that it should be treated like other commodities or assets instead of being regulated under securities law framework .


In conclusion, Binance asserted that there isn’t enough evidence provided by the agency for them to grant their restraining order request; thus it should be denied due to its potential destructive consequences over their customers as well as other stakeholders involved with them

You may also like...