Khurram Dara, a former policy counsel at cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase, is considering a run for New York State Attorney General in 2026, aiming to replace Letitia James.

In comments to Cointelegraph, Dara said he had not yet decided whether to run for the state’s law enforcement office, but hinted that digital assets could play a role in his campaign if he chooses to do so.

With more than a year until the election, the Columbia Law School graduate has already posted to social media in support of Tornado Cash co-founder Roman Storm, found guilty in New York’s federal court in August, and gone after figures like Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who has often connected crypto with illegal activities. 

“My platform would be focused on ending lawfare across the board, which certainly includes crypto,” said Dara. “We just had an election where crypto was very much on the ballot. And we won. But as the federal regulatory environment has shifted and settled, some state AGs believe it’s their role to fill a perceived ‘gap’ in federal policy […] effectively acting as national policymakers or regulators.”

The current New York attorney general, who assumed office in 2019, has taken several legal actions against crypto entities on behalf of affected New Yorkers, including Genesis, former Celsius CEO Alex Mashinsky, trading company NovaTech and KuCoin.

The US state, as a commerce hub in the country, is home to the headquarters of Gemini, Galaxy Digital, Chainalysis and others, making the AG position significant for how the office handles rules and enforcement concerning digital assets.

Related: New York AG urges Congress to bolster protections in crypto bills

“We are seeing the real dangers of unregulated cryptocurrency platforms with schemes like these,” said James, referring to allegations against NovaTech in June 2024. “New Yorkers can rest assured that we will use the tools at our disposal to crack down on crypto fraudsters.”

Cointelegraph reached out to James’ campaign for comment, but had not received a response at the time of publication. As of Wednesday, she had not announced that she plans to run for reelection in 2026.

Another Republican lawyer challenging a Democrat incumbent

Dara, a 36-year-old who works at the Council on Foreign Relations, has never held elected office. He was an intern in the New York State Senate in 2006, an intern for the office of Republican Thomas Reynolds in the US House of Representatives in 2008 and a law clerk for the US Attorney’s Office in 2012.

Should he decide to run as a Republican, he would not be the first candidate with experience litigating for crypto companies to challenge an established Democrat.

John Deaton, a lawyer who advocated for XRP (XRP) tokenholders in the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s lawsuit against Ripple Labs, ran against Warren in the 2024 election in Massachusetts. Warren defeated Deaton with about 74% of the vote.

“New York is where many people in crypto, tech and venture want to be. Incredible density of talent here,” said Dara. “I think the state should embrace that, rather than try to run from it […] the crypto community is not asking for special treatment or special policies that favor them. They just don’t want to be targeted unfairly with regulation by litigation.”

A Siena College poll from December 2024 reportedly gave James a 40% favorable rating among New Yorkers. As of August, the only other candidate to throw his hat into the ring for New York AG in 2026 is Republican Michael Henry, who lost to James in 2022 with about 45% of the vote.

Magazine: New York’s PubKey Bitcoin bar will orange-pill Washington DC next

]]> https://earlybirdsinvest.com/crypto-lawyer-signals-challenge-to-ny-ag-with-lawfare-message/feed/ 0 53077 https://earlybirdsinvest.com/lawyer-admits-forging-judges-signature/ https://earlybirdsinvest.com/lawyer-admits-forging-judges-signature/#respond Thu, 31 Jul 2025 13:27:59 +0000 https://earlybirdsinvest.com/lawyer-admits-forging-judges-signature/

A lawyer in Hollidaysburg, Pennsylvania, pleaded guilty in federal court to forging the signature of a U.S. district judge. Michael Brandon Cohen, 41, did so twice after failing to file a lawsuit on behalf of a civil client. From a Department of Justice press release:

On May 18, 2022, and October 13, 2022, Cohen sent the victim fake court orders purportedly issued by Chief United States District Judge for the Middle District of Pennsylvania Matthew W. Brann in the victim’s favor against the healthcare company. The orders awarded the victim monetary sanctions and fees and bore the electronic signature of the Chief Judge. Chief Judge Brann never issued the orders and, therefore, did not authorize his electronic signature on the orders. Rather, Cohen forged Chief Judge Brann’s signature on the fake orders in an effort to authenticate their legitimacy to his victim client.

He had never filed the lawsuit against the defendant, a healthcare company, so Brann had never seen it, let alone issued any orders in the case. It’s hard to imagine how this could have worked out for Cohen, who faces years in prison and up to $500,000 in fines. The guilty plea could win him a lighter sentence when he’s sentenced in November.

Cohen was already disbarred in Pennsylvania and the Bedford Gazette reports that he also faces a third-degree felony county of theft after homeowners in Kimmel Township there accused him of misappropriating $60,000. Heather Koontz writes that Cohen was hired to deal with a lien on a property, was provided the money to settle the relevant debts, but did not do so.

According to court records, Cohen told the man that he settled with Wells Fargo, and if he and his wife would pay $60,000, they would own the property with no liens on it. … The victims later discovered their house listed for sheriff’s sale and contacted Cohen, who said he would have the sale reversed.

On Jan. 30, 2024, members of the Sheriff’s Department arrived on scene with a court order forcing the couple to vacate, which they did, before they again called Cohen about the issue. Cohen, according to reports, again ensured them he would get the sale reversed.

And so on, and so on. Reads like a case of “new story to cover the old story” until that’s not possible anymore. There’s some more details at the Altoona Mirror.

In a criminal complaint, police officers said Cohen told them that in 2022, he started feeling as though he was losing his mind and stopped going to work. Officers said he was advising clients that he would look into their matters or file something when he hadn’t. Officers said Cohen also spoke of how guilt had caused him to give away money held in escrow and his own money to clients who were told that he had resolved their cases.

When Haines quizzed Cohen about his work history, Cohen spoke of practicing law until April 2023. He said since fall 2023, he has been working as a marketing manager for a window and door replacement company.

Previously:
• ‘Dragon lawyer’ annoys judge with cartoon dragon watermark
• Judge fines lawyers $31k after they use AI to generate brief with made-up citations
• Lawyer in Florida who fought against helmet laws killed on motorcycle while not wearing a helmet

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

Legal expert Bill Morgan has commented on accusations that Ripple would dump its XRP escrow holdings at some point. He explained why that won’t happen and noted how the escrow strategy is good for the altcoin’s price. 

Ripple’s Escrow Will Buttress XRP Price Not Deflate It

In an X post, Bill Morgan noted that even the SEC recognized that Ripple’s escrow was intended to buttress the XRP price and not deflate it. He added that even the Commission considered this to be one of the factors that would give investors an expectation of profit from the crypto firm’s efforts. 

The legal then remarked that this is just one of the points that clearly debunks the ‘dump theory’ around Ripple’s escrow. His response was in reply to a crypto community member who criticized XRP holders who think that the escrow is good for their holdings. He then indicated that the crypto firm would at some point dump its holdings on these investors. 

Meanwhile, Bill Morgan had earlier noted how there hasn’t been a stark difference between Ripple’s escrowed funds in 2017 and now. He revealed that the crypto firm had 55 billion XRP in escrow in late 2017 while it now has 35 billion in escrow. Ripple unlocks 1 billion XRP monthly. As such, these escrowed funds should have reduced drastically since 2017. 

However, Ripple typically relocks a significant portion of these coins following the monthly unlocks, which explains why the crypto firm’s holdings haven’t flooded the market. Notably, the firm uses these coins for its on-demand liquidity (ODL) services. As such, the coins that are left unlocked are in demand, which also provides a boost for the XRP price. Ripple is also looking to expand its operations, which could further boost the altcoin’s adoption. 

Reason For the Escrow ‘Dump Theory’

In response to the accusations against Ripple, Bill Morgan suggested that many of these crypto community members have been simply sidelined on the recent XRP price rally. As such, he believes this is why they are trying to spread Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD). In an X post, he asked a particular critic if they missed out on XRP when it was still trading at $0.20.

Indeed, the XRP price had traded around this level in 2023 and remained stuck in the $0.50 range for most of 2024 before finally taking off in the last quarter of the year, recording a rally of over 500%. The altcoin has continued this run this year and last week rallied to a new all-time high (ATH) of $3.65. 

At the time of writing, the XRP price is trading at around $3.50, up in the last 24 hours, according to data from CoinMarketCap.

Featured image from Getty Images, chart from Tradingview.com

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

That ruling hit Ripple with a $125 million fine and prohibited it from selling XRP to institutional investors. Terrett’s sources suggest Ripple’s team is pushing back, insisting that if the SEC’s new leadership aims to “wipe the enforcement slate clean” for previously-targeted crypto firms, Ripple should not be held to a judgment that may no longer reflect the agency’s stance. Terrett noted “there’s no real playbook for this,” emphasizing how this unique scenario may be “taking longer to resolve than the rest.”

An Easy Path To End The XRP Lawsuit

Pro-XRP attorney Fred Rispoli contends via X that resolving the dispute over the ruling should be relatively straightforward—if the SEC is willing. “I just don’t see this being the big issue some are making it out to be,” he remarked, calling the process unorthodox but not overly complicated.

According to Rispoli, there are multiple ways the agency and Ripple could neutralize Judge Torres’ order. He stressed: “The SEC and Ripple can file a motion to vacate the judgment–the cleanest way to dispose of it. Telling the the Court ‘in consideration for potentially losing our entire crypto jurisdiction if we lose the appeal, we’re agreeing to vacate judgment in exchange for Ripple dropping its appeal.’ Torres is not going to second guess this.”

He also noted that even without formally vacating the order, the SEC could draft an agreement stating it will not enforce the ruling for the same consideration. “The SEC doesn’t even have to vacate the order. It can simply draft an agreement with Ripple that it won’t enforce the judgment for the same consideration set out,” Rispoli said.

Alluding to the agency’s broad discretion under its Enforcement Manual, which routinely recommends settlement over uncertain litigation, Rispoli added: “The SEC Enforcement Manual has all kinds of general, vague language that recommends cooperation and settlement over the uncertainties of litigation so the authority for this behavior is covered […] but even if it weren’t, who cares? This isn’t a good thing, but the SEC (and most other .gov agencies) has proven it does what it wants, when it wants, without regard to due process. Here, it works in justice’s favor for once.”

Despite Rispoli’s optimism, some community members worry about a potential resurgence of stricter enforcement under different leadership down the line. One user on social media platform X posed the question: “What if, say, in 4 years, we are back to a Gensler-style SEC and the SEC then tries to enforce the injunction?”

Rispoli responded: “That’s the ONLY fear … But it could be wiped out with a superseding agreement between SEC and Ripple. And if your scenario happens, crypto already lost and a lot more folks than just Ripple would be worried.”

Can A Court’s Decision Really Be Overridden?

A second point of contention involves whether or not the SEC can effectively negate a district court’s decision through a negotiated settlement. Critics argue that administrative agencies should not be able to override final rulings.

Rispoli, however, referenced a notable precedent involving Citigroup. He pointed to SEC v. Citigroup Global Markets, Inc., 673 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2012), in which an appellate court reversed a district judge’s refusal to approve an SEC settlement.

“It’s happened before,” he noted, highlighting that courts often give significant deference to consent decrees and settlement agreements proposed by the SEC and its enforcement targets. In that case, the Second Circuit concluded the district court erred by not deferring to the SEC’s judgment in accepting a settlement.

At press time, XRP traded at $2.21.

Argentine lawyer Gregorio Dalbon has reportedly called on Interpol to issue a Red Notice for crypto entrepreneur Hayden Davis, linking him to the collapse of the Libra memecoin.

Davis is the CEO of Kelsier Ventures and a central figure behind the controversial Solana-based Libra memecoin whose market capitalization plunged by more than $4 billion amid accusations of a pump-and-dump scheme

Reports suggest that Davis and other key figures behind the Solana-based token amassed more than $107 million before the project imploded. Adding to the controversy, Davis allegedly claimed he wielded political influence over Argentine President Javier Milei.

Despite the issues, Davis has publicly defended himself. In an interview with YouTube investigator Stephen Findeisen, better known as “Coffeezilla,” he dismissed allegations of fraud and characterized the Libra token’s downfall as a business failure rather than a deliberate scam.

Interpol’s red notice

According to a local media report, Dalbon submitted his request to Eduardo Taiano, the lead prosecutor investigating the case, and Judge María Servini overseeing the proceedings.

Dalbon argued that Davis played a pivotal role in creating and promoting the Libra memecoin. He raised concerns about Davis’ ability to evade legal action, citing his financial resources and foreign residency as potential risks.

The lawyer further warned that allowing Davis to remain at large could obstruct legal proceedings, especially given the scale of investor losses.

The report stated:

“The possibility that Davis may leave his country of residence or go into hiding to avoid criminal liability for the events under investigation is aggravated by his financial resources , which could make it easier for him to move around or remain in hiding, thus frustrating the progress of the investigation.”

Considering this, Dalbon wants an international arrest warrant (Red Notice) issued for Davis.

A Red Notice is an Interpol request urging global law enforcement agencies to arrest a suspect pending extradition. However, compliance remains voluntary as individual countries decide whether to act based on their national laws.

This latest move adds to the intensifying investigation into the Libra memecoin scandal. Last week, Prosecutor Taiano took steps to secure key digital evidence, including transaction records and promotional materials. He also initiated efforts to freeze over $100 million allegedly pocketed by the token’s creators.

Mentioned in this article

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

United States President Donald Trump’s decision to create a national crypto stockpile and a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (SBR) has sparked debate. Industry analyst Jake Chervinsky contends that while some see it as a positive move, it is not enough to establish the US as the global leader in cryptocurrencies.

A Solid Start But Not The Complete Solution

Chervinsky, the chief legal officer at Variant, believes that while the SBR is a positive step, it does not make the US as the global center of cryptocurrency. He claims that in this situation, true leadership demands more than just keeping up with digital assets. Without strong regulations that foster innovation, the US faces the risk of falling behind countries with superior regulatory frameworks.

He argued that fostering an environment that allows blockchain engineers and entrepreneurs to thrive is just as important as hoarding Bitcoin. Without clear regulations and support, businesses may choose to operate elsewhere, abandoning the US.

1/ The Reserve and Stockpile are likely good for US fiscal policy and market prices, but neither are enough to make the USA the crypto capital of the world.

For that, we need new policies empowering entrepreneurs to launch protocols and products made in the USA.

Here’s how

— Jake Chervinsky (@jchervinsky) March 7, 2025

The Future May Be Shaped By The Crypto Summit

The SBR has been a key topic as crypto leaders gathered at Trump’s White House Crypto Summit with strategic reserve in focus. The event brought together financial professionals, business executives, and policymakers to examine the country’s approach to digital assets. Many in the cryptocurrency community view this as a watershed moment to push for better legislation and more transparent regulations.

As of today, the market cap of digital assets stood at $2.78 trillion. Chart: TradingView

Chervinsky has made a strong case for the necessity of a long-term strategy. If the government truly wants to be at the forefront of cryptocurrencies, he argues, it must do more than just buy Bitcoin. Policies that promote blockchain development, safeguard investors, and provide regulatory certainty will be essential to global competition.

“For that, we need new policies that will empower entrepreneurs to launch protocols made in the USA,” he posited. “Being ‘the crypto capital’, he said, doesn’t mean “holding the most crypto wealth compared to other countries.”

Chervinsky pointed out that to be a crypto powerhouse, it means “having the most innovation, the most jobs, the most influence, and the most economic activity.” And, in order to attain this, the government “must support businesses, not just assets.”

Other Nations Move Fast

Other countries are making progress as the United States considers its next move. Countries like Singapore, the United Arab Emirates, and Switzerland have passed laws that are favorable to cryptocurrencies, which attracts businesses and innovators. The retention of outstanding people and creative ideas in these areas is at risk if the US does not take such action.

The digital currency sector is also keeping an eye on how the government handles regulations. Some US businesses have considered relocating their operations abroad due to policies that are difficult to understand, not to mention ongoing legal issues.

Featured image from Gemini Imagen, chart from TradingView

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

Lawyer James “MetaLawMan” Murphy of Ludlow Street Advisors, LLC has provided a detailed theory on why the SEC’s dismissal of the Ripple case has been inexplicably delayed. According to Murphy, rather than the delay being solely due to the SEC’s internal processes, it could be that Ripple is engaged in strenuous negotiations aimed at revising key components of Judge Torres’ ruling.

Ripple, Not SEC, Might Be Stalling Case Resolution

Murphy explained that while Judge Torres’ decision was undoubtedly beneficial for XRP holders—particularly regarding aspects that positively impact market sentiment—the decision also contained elements that could jeopardize the company’s future strategic moves. “The Torres decision was unquestionably GREAT for XRP holders, BUT the finding of securities law violations and the injunction with attendant ‘bad boy’ provisions are not so great for Ripple,” Murphy stated via X.

He further speculated that if Ripple is considering a future exempt securities offering or an IPO, the current judgment would represent a significant operational and reputational hurdle. He continued, “I believe the SEC would have accepted a settlement—where both sides dismiss their appeals and the SEC takes the $125 million penalty—in a heartbeat. So, it makes sense that Ripple could be negotiating for a better deal than that.” Although he acknowledges the speculative nature of his theory, Murphy’s comments offer a glimpse into the complex legal maneuvers potentially at play.

Complementing Murphy’s perspective, pro-XRP lawyer Jeremy Hogan delved into the intricate legal process of dissolving the injunction imposed by Judge Torres. Hogan pointed out that the court’s order effectively bars Ripple from making direct sales to customers—a restriction that Ripple would undoubtedly prefer to eliminate.

“Ripple would rather not have the injunction at all,” Hogan remarked. He drew an analogy between the legal process and personal restraining orders, emphasizing that “once a court issues an injunction, the parties themselves can’t simply agree between them to disregard the injunction.” He further illustrated the point with a vivid comparison: many individuals have faced legal consequences for assuming that a restraining order could be casually ignored when personal relationships improved.

Hogan’s analysis extended into the procedural challenges that both Ripple and the SEC must navigate in order to modify the existing court order. He elaborated on the role of Federal Rule 60, which governs “relief from a judgment,” noting that any motion to vacate the injunction must convincingly demonstrate a significant change in circumstances.

“The court based its decision on the Howey test, not on the SEC’s rule changes, and the SEC cannot ‘Trump’ US Supreme Court law,” Hogan explained. This point underscores the rigidity of legal precedent in securities law, which complicates any attempt by Ripple to negotiate a rollback of the injunction solely on the basis of evolving regulatory standards.

Ripple would first need to convince the SEC to sign off on a carefully drafted motion that seeks to dissolve the injunction. Following this, both parties would have to stipulate to dismiss their appeals, and then the trial court would need to rule favorably on the motion. Hogan suggested that “this is why I think the case doesn’t resolve until April-May whereas all these other cases have already been dismissed.” He also left open the possibility that if the motion is crafted and executed with exceptional care, the appeals might be dismissed even earlier—potentially in April, before Ripple’s brief due date.

At press time, XRP traded at $

Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com