Skip to main content
BitCurrent

Crypto markets, protocols and policy

Judge keeps Gemini’s $5 million CFTC consent order in place

A Manhattan judge left Gemini’s $5 million CFTC consent order in place, finding policy shifts and later-obtained material insufficient to reopen the case.

BitCurrent Newsroom2 min read

Judge keeps Gemini’s $5 million CFTC consent order in place

A 2025 consent order ended the CFTC’s lawsuit over Gemini’s proposed bitcoin futures contract. On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein rejected a joint request by the agency and Gemini to set it aside, according to Reuters’ report on the ruling.

  • Penalty: $5 million, already paid by Gemini.
  • Original lawsuit: filed in 2022.
  • Consent order: entered January 2025.

What did Gemini and the CFTC ask the court to change?

In May 2026, Gemini Trust Co. and the CFTC jointly asked Hellerstein to vacate the order or, as a fallback, remove its forward-looking terms. The order includes an injunction and Gemini’s promise not to publicly deny its findings.

The parties argued that the CFTC’s enforcement priorities had changed and that a later agency review found problems with how the case was brought. The CFTC said it would not bring the case under its current approach, and the parties cited concerns about agency tactics and a whistleblower, Unchained reported.

Why did Hellerstein reject the joint request?

Hellerstein found that the policy shift did not amount to a significant change in law, and that material learned after the settlement concerned facts that already existed when the order was entered. Gemini had litigated for more than three years before choosing to settle shortly before trial, he wrote.

The judge said later information may have caused Gemini to regret settling, but did not make enforcing the order unfair. The CFTC’s current view that the case should not have been brought was not enough to undo the judgment.

What remains open after the ruling?

The consent order remains in force, and the $5 million penalty will not be refunded. Hellerstein said the CFTC retains discretion over its enforcement priorities, which it may consider when deciding whether to enforce the order.

The ruling leaves that enforcement question with the agency. It does not vacate the court order or resolve whether the CFTC will pursue enforcement under its current policy.

Source material