Trump explicitly refuses to pardon FTX founder SBF. Where is the "red line" for crypto-friendly policies?

U.S. President Donald Trump recently stated in an exclusive interview with The New York Times that he will not pardon Samuel Bankman-Fried (SBF), the co-founder of the FTX exchange who is currently serving time. SBF was sentenced to 25 years in prison for fraud and conspiracy, and his parents were previously reported to have actively sought a pardon.

This move contrasts sharply with the pardons issued after Trump took office, which included key figures in the crypto industry such as Binance founder CZ and Silk Road creator Ross Ulbricht. The decision is not only about individuals but is also seen as an attempt by Trump to delineate his “crypto-friendly” policies from the industry’s most serious fraud scandals, thereby defining the “bottom line” of his political support. It sends a complex signal to the market: regulatory leniency does not mean turning a blind eye to criminal behavior.

Trump Clearly States: The Path to SBF Pardon Is Completely Closed

In a recent two-hour interview with The New York Times, U.S. President Donald Trump was asked whether he would consider pardoning several high-profile individuals, including former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, who was convicted of fraud. Trump gave a clear and direct negative response. This statement effectively closes the last door to any potential pardon efforts by SBF’s family and team, which had been quietly pushing for clemency over the past few months.

SBF’s legal troubles began with the shocking collapse of his crypto exchange FTX, which he founded. In November 2023, a jury found him guilty of multiple counts of fraud and conspiracy, involving the misappropriation of billions of dollars of customer funds. In March of the following year, he was sentenced to 25 years in prison. His legal team is currently appealing the conviction and sentence. According to media reports, as early as January 2025—shortly after Trump took office—SBF’s parents, Stanford Law School professor Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried, began lobbying and reaching out to lawyers and possibly White House contacts to seek a pardon for their son.

However, Trump’s recent statement has dashed these efforts. Notably, SBF’s relationship with Trump’s political spectrum has always been at odds. Public records show that during the 2020 election, SBF was one of Biden’s largest donors, contributing about $5.2 million to support his campaign against Trump. This political history undoubtedly creates an insurmountable obstacle for his pardon application. Although SBF recently praised Trump’s pardon of former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández on his X account managed by friends, attempting to send a signal, it clearly did not change the outcome.

Political Calculations and Industry Segmentation: Why Is SBF the Only One Excluded from the Pardon List?

Trump’s rejection of SBF is not a sudden whim; it is intertwined with strategic political considerations, personal preferences, and the complex management of the crypto industry’s image. Analysts suggest this reflects Trump’s attempt to draw a clear “red line” between embracing crypto innovation and upholding legal and moral standards.

First, from a symbolic political perspective, the SBF case is no longer just about financial crime; it has become a “symbolic marker” of fraud, misconduct, and governance failure in the global cryptocurrency industry. Pardoning SBF would send a highly destructive signal: that even such large-scale crimes can be forgiven if committed within the crypto sector. This would undermine Trump’s self-proclaimed image as a “law and order” defender and could anger ordinary voters and investors who suffered losses from the FTX collapse, making it a politically unwise move.

Second, Trump’s “crypto-friendly” policy has a clear strategic and electoral orientation. He openly stated during the interview: “I gained a lot of votes because of my support for cryptocurrencies, and I’ve started to like them too.” He elevates the crypto industry’s competition to the level of the U.S.-China global leadership contest. This support focuses on overall industry development, innovation environment, and job creation, rather than protecting individual “bad actors.” Pardoning CZ or Ulbricht could be seen as correcting “overregulation” or “politicized prosecutions,” but pardoning SBF would be widely viewed as tolerating outright theft of customer assets—two fundamentally different issues.

Third, this reflects Trump’s nuanced attitude toward internal crypto industry “factions.” The pardons of CZ and Ulbricht, though legally questionable, carry a “resistance to the old system” or ideological purity aura within certain communities. SBF, on the other hand, is seen as a “pseudo-god” who exploited industry hype for traditional financial fraud, severely damaging public trust in the crypto ecosystem. Cutting ties with SBF helps Trump differentiate his crypto narrative from such trust-damaging behaviors.

Comparison of Key Legal Situations of Crypto Industry Figures During Trump’s Presidency

• Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF):

  • Role: Co-founder and former CEO of FTX.
  • Main charges: Telecom fraud, conspiracy to defraud customers, among 7 counts.
  • Involved amount: Misappropriated customer funds totaling billions of dollars.
  • Sentence: 25 years imprisonment.
  • Trump’s stance: Explicitly refuses to pardon.
  • Political background: Major donor supporting Biden’s campaign.

• CZ:

  • Role: Founder of Binance.
  • Main charges: Violations of U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, failure to maintain effective AML programs.
  • Resolution: Resigned, paid a hefty $4.3 billion fine, and settled with authorities.
  • Trump’s stance: Pardoned in 2025.
  • Note: White House described him as “being prosecuted in Biden’s crypto war.”

• Ross Ulbricht:

  • Role: Creator of Silk Road.
  • Main charges: Conspiracy related to drug trafficking, hacking, etc.
  • Original sentence: Life imprisonment.
  • Trump’s stance: Pardoned in 2025.
  • Note: Considered a “free speech symbol” in the crypto punk community; pardons sparked controversy.

“Selective Pardon” Record: A Window into Trump’s Crypto Legal Balancing Act

Trump’s refusal to pardon SBF must be viewed in the context of a series of crypto-related pardons since his inauguration. This “selective pardon” clearly outlines his judicial calculus.

Most notable is the pardon of CZ. After admitting to violations of AML regulations and paying a huge fine, CZ was pardoned in 2025. The White House press secretary explained that the president was exercising his constitutional authority and implied CZ was a “victim of Biden’s crypto war.” This pardon is widely seen as Trump’s strongest signal of friendliness toward the crypto industry, aimed at reassuring the world’s largest exchange platform and its user base.

More controversial is the pardon of Ross Ulbricht. The creator of Silk Road, sentenced to life for drug trafficking and other crimes, has a high profile among libertarians and some crypto-native groups, who see the sentence as excessive. Trump’s January 2025 pardon decision, despite sparking significant social controversy, undoubtedly gained him favor among key supporters in the hardcore crypto community.

Additionally, the co-founder of the crypto derivatives exchange BitMEX was also granted clemency. These actions suggest Trump views pardons as a flexible political tool to reward “allies,” correct what he perceives as “judicial injustice” (especially in cases prosecuted under Democratic administrations), and solidify support among certain voter groups. However, all these pardons share a common premise: the crimes involved do not directly and massively infringe on ordinary consumers’ assets like the SBF case. This “bottom line” is a boundary Trump is determined to uphold.

Deep Impact: Reevaluating Industry Regulation, Market Confidence, and Political Risks

Trump’s decision to refuse to pardon SBF is expected to have multi-layered, far-reaching effects on the crypto industry, prompting market participants to reassess political, legal, and business risks.

From a regulatory and compliance perspective, this sends a clear warning: even under a “crypto-friendly” administration, core financial crimes such as misappropriation of customer funds and fraud will not be tolerated. This could accelerate industry segmentation, encouraging mainstream institutions to strengthen compliance and distance themselves from gray-area business models. It may also give Congress more reason to emphasize consumer asset protection when crafting crypto regulations.

For market confidence, this is a contradictory message. In the short term, distancing from the industry’s biggest scandal can improve the overall image of cryptocurrencies in traditional finance and public perception, signaling “the industry is cleaning house.” But in the long run, it reminds investors that political risks in crypto remain complex; presidential preferences can shift regulatory directions but cannot override fundamental legal principles. Relying on “political redemption” rather than solid business ethics and risk management is extremely dangerous.

Finally, this event highlights the increasing entanglement of the crypto industry in U.S. domestic political polarization. Crypto policies have become a new battleground between parties, and the personal political inclinations and past actions of industry leaders may have unforeseen consequences at critical moments. SBF’s case shows that past political donations can become liabilities when political forgiveness is needed. Going forward, maintaining proper distance from political power while effectively promoting policies conducive to industry development will be a key challenge for all crypto companies.