As the trial for Anton and James Peraire-Bueno reached its 11th day, a decision is anticipated soon from the judge regarding Coin Center’s ability to submit an amicus brief.
Federal attorneys are opposing attempts to inject cryptocurrency policy debates into the case against two brothers, who are accused of manipulating the Ethereum network using MEV bots.
In a Tuesday court filing with the Southern District of New York, federal prosecutors contested an amicus brief—a “friend of the court” submission from an uninvolved party. The government argued this brief could improperly urge a jury to clear Anton and James Peraire-Bueno, who are accused of executing a $25-million MEV exploit on the Ethereum blockchain in April 2023.
The correspondence, which was directed to the case’s presiding judge, argued that Coin Center, the crypto advocacy group filing the brief, should take its digital asset policy concerns to Congress rather than the judiciary.
“To allow an amicus brief of this type—i.e., arguing that the defendants should be acquitted because of the implications to an industry or to internet users writ large—is to allow the defendants to argue for nullification and is lawless,” said the filing. “The sole concern of the Court […] is whether a reasonable jury could find the defendants guilty based on the evidence adduced at trial. Larger questions of policy are not appropriately heard in this arena.”
Reacting to the federal government’s correspondence, the defense counsel for the Peraire-Bueno brothers asserted the Coin Center brief would offer a “unique perspective that will aid the Court” concerning the prosecution’s central legal argument, as was reported.
“Because Ethereum users are engaged in economic activity […], the government’s theory would mean that any trading strategy or engagement with another user with whom a user has an adversarial or competitive relationship (i.e., everybody else) that involves a deviation from the blockchain’s protocol specifications could give rise to federal criminal liability,”
said the defense team in a Wednesday filing
“The government thus far has refused to even defend this breathtaking theory […] which is inconsistent with common sense and Second Circuit precedent.”
adding:
Industry Watching the Case Closely
Opening statements in the proceedings against the two siblings began on October 15th, over a year after the pair were formally indicted on charges including conspiracy to commit wire fraud, money laundering, and conspiracy to receive stolen property.
The criminal proceedings revolve around the Peraire-Buenos’ deployment of MEV bots to allegedly effect the removal of $25 million in cryptocurrency during 2023.
A Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) attack happens when the sequence of transactions within a block is manipulated by a blockchain validator or trader to secure illicit financial gain.
Based on figures which were cited in a July report by the European Securities and Markets Authority, Ethereum-linked MEV proceeds amounted to approximately $963 million between December 2022 and January 2025, yielding profits of around $417 million.
Industry Closely Monitors High-Stakes Crypto Trial
Due to the significant implications that a guilty verdict and judicial rulings might have on the broader crypto sector, the proceedings have been closely observed by numerous industry executives and advocacy groups. sought comment from a Coin Center representative but had yet to receive a reply when this article was released.
The United States government alleges that the siblings “tricked their victims” through a “high-speed bait and switch” to unlawfully obtain the cryptocurrency. In contrast, defense attorneys contend that the actual “victims here were sandwich bots,” and a simple trading strategy was employed by the Peraire-Buenos to extract the digital assets.
The court proceedings entered their eleventh day as of Wednesday, with sessions being expected to continue into November. Should a guilty verdict be reached, the presiding judge may impose sentences of up to two decades in prison for the brothers on each count detailed in the indictment.
