Judge Dismisses Key SEC Claims Against Binance in Landmark Crypto Ruling

In a ruling that sends shockwaves through the cryptocurrency regulatory landscape, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson dismisses a significant portion of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s lawsuit against Binance. The decision, issued on June 28 and reverberating through markets on June 29, determines that secondary market sales of Binance Coin (BNB) do not qualify as securities — drawing a direct parallel to the landmark Ripple ruling and offering the industry a powerful legal precedent.

TL;DR

• Judge Amy Berman Jackson dismisses the SEC’s claim that secondary market sales of BNB tokens qualify as securities
• The ruling cites Judge Torres’s Ripple decision, reinforcing that crypto assets traded on exchanges are not inherently investment contracts
• Of 13 counts in the SEC lawsuit, 10 proceed entirely, two proceed partially, and one is dismissed in full
• The dismissed count involves Binance USD (BUSD), the now-defunct stablecoin
• BNB trades at approximately $571 following the ruling, down nearly 3% for the week

Breaking Down the Ruling

Judge Jackson’s decision marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing tension between cryptocurrency exchanges and federal regulators. The core question at stake is whether tokens traded on secondary markets — the buying and selling of crypto assets on exchanges like Binance, Coinbase, and others — constitute securities transactions under the Howey Test, the legal framework used to determine whether an asset qualifies as an investment contract.

The SEC argues that BNB’s secondary market sales meet the Howey Test criteria because buyers reasonably expect profits derived from the efforts of Binance’s team. Judge Jackson disagrees, finding that the government’s reliance on the assertion that crypto assets are the embodiment of investment contracts falls short of establishing that secondary market transactions satisfy the legal standard for securities.

The ruling directly references Judge Analisa Torres’s decision in the SEC vs. Ripple case, where the court determined that secondary market sales of XRP do not constitute investment contracts. Judge Jackson describes Judge Torres’s observations on the nature of the token itself as “clarifying and persuasive,” signaling a growing judicial consensus that challenges the SEC’s broad interpretation of securities law as applied to digital assets.

What Survives and What Falls

While the dismissal of the secondary market sales claim represents a significant victory for Binance and the broader crypto industry, the bulk of the SEC’s lawsuit remains intact. Of the 13 counts in the original complaint, 10 proceed in their entirety, and two additional counts proceed partially. The sole fully dismissed count relates to Binance USD (BUSD), the stablecoin jointly issued with Paxos that ceased minting new tokens under regulatory pressure in 2023.

The surviving claims include allegations that Binance operated an unregistered securities exchange, failed to register as a broker-dealer, and sold unregistered securities through its initial coin offering of BNB tokens. These claims carry significant potential consequences for Binance’s U.S. operations and could reshape how crypto exchanges structure their businesses domestically.

Legal observers note that the partial nature of the ruling means both sides can claim victories. The SEC retains the core of its enforcement action, while Binance secures a precedent-setting dismissal that weakens the agency’s ability to treat all secondary market crypto transactions as securities.

Implications for the Broader Crypto Industry

The decision carries weight far beyond the Binance case. By endorsing the Ripple framework’s treatment of secondary market sales, Judge Jackson creates a second federal court precedent that crypto assets traded on exchanges are not per se securities. This dual-track judicial reasoning strengthens the legal position of every cryptocurrency project and exchange facing SEC enforcement actions.

Blockchain technology companies, decentralized finance protocols, and token projects across the ecosystem can point to two federal court rulings that reject the SEC’s expansive view of its jurisdiction over secondary market transactions. The practical effect is that tokens listed on exchanges may receive different legal treatment depending on the context of the transaction — initial offerings may face scrutiny, but secondary trading appears increasingly protected.

The ruling also adds momentum to legislative efforts in Congress to establish clear regulatory frameworks for digital assets. With multiple courts now pushing back on the SEC’s enforcement-first approach, lawmakers face growing pressure to provide statutory clarity rather than leaving the industry to navigate a patchwork of judicial interpretations.

BNB Market Reaction

BNB trades at approximately $571 following the ruling, reflecting a modest decline of nearly 3% over the past week. The token’s price action suggests that market participants view the ruling as incrementally positive but not transformative for BNB’s near-term prospects. BNB’s decline from its June 6 high of $721.80 to a June 24 low of $551.20 underscores the broader market weakness affecting major cryptocurrencies in late Q2.

Technical indicators show underlying negative momentum in BNB’s price trend, with the Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) signaling continued bearish pressure. The 23.6% Fibonacci retracement level at $591.50 represents the nearest meaningful resistance level, while support sits at the June 24 low of $551.20.

Why This Matters

This ruling represents a critical inflection point in the legal battle over cryptocurrency regulation in the United States. For the first time, two federal judges have now rejected the SEC’s argument that secondary market sales of crypto tokens automatically qualify as securities transactions. This judicial trend significantly limits the SEC’s enforcement toolkit and creates a stronger foundation for crypto businesses to operate within existing legal frameworks. As the industry awaits further legislative action from Congress and additional court decisions, the Binance ruling provides a measure of legal clarity that has been sorely lacking. For investors and builders alike, the message is clear: the courts are increasingly willing to distinguish between tokens as technology and tokens as investment contracts — a distinction that could define the future of blockchain innovation in America.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or legal advice. Cryptocurrency investments carry significant risk. Always conduct your own research before making investment decisions.