In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Coinbase on Thursday in the crypto exchange’s latest dispute before the nation’s top legal venue. The 9-0 ruling, however, did not address any of Coinbase’s crypto-related practices—nor is it likely to impact the Instead, the decision addressed a single bureaucratic element of Coinbase’s ongoing legal battle against a class-action group of disgruntled customers who “Previously, the crypto exchange sought to settle the case via arbitration, citing user agreements that every Coinbase customer consents to in order to use the platform. A federal judge All nine Supreme Court justices agreed today that a lower court should decide which of the two agreements should take precedence here, as opposed to ruling outright that the case should be settled in arbitration, as Coinbase desired. “Basic legal principles establish the answer,” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote today in the Court’s opinion. “[Coinbase’s] arguments are unpersuasive.”The exchange had argued that if the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the lawsuit’s class-action plaintiffs, that ruling would unleash a torrent of legal disarray by encouraging other parties to wiggle out of arbitration agreements across the country. “We do not believe that such chaos will follow,” Justice Jackson responded today.America’s largest crypto exchange first went before the Supreme Court The ongoing class-action suit against Coinbase, filed by former Coinbase user David Suski, alleges that the exchange’s 2021 The fine print of the contest revealed that you could also enter for free by mailing in an index card with your name, address, and birthday—given the United States’ Suski and other plaintiffs argue they would have never spent $100 on DOGE had they known of the loophole. While today’s decision will likely have little impact on crypto’s ongoing battle for regulatory legitimacy, it did notch one minor achievement: it marks the first time a U.S. Supreme Court Justice has ever had to write the word “Dogecoin” in an official Court opinion.Edited by Ryan Ozawa.
