The Class Action Weekly Wire – Episode 144: Class Action Litigation In The Digital Assets & Blockchain Sector (Podcast)

Duane Morris Takeaway:This week’s episode features Duane Morris partners Jerry Maatman and Mauro Wolfe and senior associate Hayley Ryan with their discussion of Duane Morris’ Digital Assets & Blockchain Class Action Review, highlighting several trends and developments shaping class action litigation in this space.

Check out today’s episode and subscribe to our show from your preferred podcast platform: Spotify, Amazon Music, Apple Podcasts, Podcast Index, Tune In, Listen Notes, iHeartRadio, Deezer, and YouTube.

Episode Transcript

Jerry Maatman: Welcome to our listeners. Thank you for being here for our weekly podcast series, the Class Action Weekly Wire. I’m Jerry Maatman, a partner at Duane Morris, and joining me today are my colleagues Mauro Wolfe and Hayley Ryan. Mauro is joining us for the first time – he’s our lead partner in Duane Morris’ Digital Assets and Blockchain Practice Group, a multidisciplinary group of over 50 lawyers providing a full suite of services to clients in the cryptocurrency, digital assets, and blockchain industries, both domestically and internationally. Thank you both for being on the podcast today.

Mauro Wolfe: Thank you, Jerry, very happy to be here.

Hayley Ryan: Thanks for having me, Jerry.

Jerry: Today on the podcast, we are discussing the publication of a brand-new desk reference, the Duane Morris Digital Assets and Blockchain Class Action Review. Listeners can find the e-book version of the publication on our blog, the Duane Morris Class Action Defense Blog. Hayley, could you tell our listeners a bit about the desk reference publication?

Hayley: Absolutely, Jerry. So, Duane Morris just released the first in a series of industry-focused class action publications called the Digital Assets and Blockchain Class Action Review – 2026. This publication analyzes the key related rulings and developments in 2025, and the significant legal decisions and trends impacting class action litigation in this industry for 2026. We hope that companies and employers will benefit from this resource in compliance with these evolving laws and standards.

Jerry: It seems like crypto litigation is everywhere right now. What’s driving that?

Mauro: First, Jerry, that’s exactly right. So, by 2025, litigation involving digital assets and blockchain companies really moved from sidelines to center stage in the area of complex financial litigation. One of the big drivers, quite frankly, is the current policy environment, and specifically what I’m referring to is, look, enforcement cases at the federal level, specifically by the SEC, is at a historic drop, you know, in excess of 30 to 40%. And what that means is that private plaintiffs are stepping in to fill the gap. We saw a huge surge in class actions last year as dozens filed, and it’s not just token issuers anymore. The net has widened significantly as to the targets of these class action cases.

Jerry: So, who specifically are the targets, now that we’re in 2026?

Hayley: Yeah, Jerry, so pretty much everyone in the ecosystem. So early on, lawsuits focused on token issuers and promoters, but now we’re seeing claims against crypto exchanges, blockchain developers, fintech platforms, Bitcoin ATM operators, and even decentralized protocol creators.

Mauro: And, major exchanges like Coinbase have been frequent defendants. I mean, plaintiffs are alleging things like operating unregistered securities under the SEC laws, listing tokens that are later characterized as securities, a lot going on.

Jerry: So private lawsuits are almost foreshadowing regulatory enforcement in this space?

Mauro: Exactly, and sometimes it’s even getting ahead of it. In fact, certainly getting ahead of it in the context of this administration, and referring to the SEC and CFTC enforcement regimes.

Jerry: What sort of claims are we talking about, then, in this space?

Hayley: Well, we’re talking about a wide range of claims, Jerry, but the most common include the sale of unregistered securities, misstatements or omissions, consumer protection violations, and data privacy breaches.

Mauro: And then, of course, there’s a long tail that includes, you know, breaches of contract, unjust enrichment, negligence, and even RICO claims. The plaintiffs’ bar is, as you know very well, Jerry, they’re very creative.

Jerry: Nothing if not innovative, that’s for sure. Why is it, then, that unregistered securities claims are so popular, for the plaintiffs’ bar?

Hayley: It’s a good question, Jerry. It’s because they’re powerful and easier to prove. You don’t need to show fraud, just that a security was sold without proper registration. So, that opens the door to rescission claims, and also class certification is often easier.

Jerry: Let’s talk about one of the key legal developments: centralized versus decentralized exchanges.

Mauro: Yeah, this was huge in ‘25. So, courts in the Second Circuit, for example, started drawing a clear distinction. If an exchange is centralized, meaning its intermediary’s transactions can potentially be liable as a statutory seller. If it’s decentralized, just coding, facilitating transactions, courts have been more hesitant to impose liability. In those cases, plaintiffs struggle to show the platform to actually a seller under the securities laws.

Jerry: Well, the million-dollar question, or maybe the billion-dollar question, is what counts as a security in digital assets?

Hayley: So, Jerry, that is still hotly contested. Courts are often sidestepping it when they can, but 2025 did bring some clarity. For example, Congress passed the Genius Act, which says fiat-backed stablecoins themselves are not securities. But, and this is key, transactions involving them still might be. Courts are still relying heavily on the Howey test, which asks whether there’s an investment contract based on expectation of profits from others’ efforts.

Jerry: In terms of your analysis of rulings in 2025, are there any standout decisions?

Mauro: Yeah, there are a couple of major rulings. One court found that selling stablecoins during a de-pegging event didn’t qualify as a security under Howey. Another reaffirmed that selling certain quote-unquote bridge tokens to institutional investors did not constitute an unregistered securities offering and refused to revisit $125 million-dollar penalty. And importantly, courts are not backing off prior rulings, just because regulatory attitude shifts, and that’s a big deal. And I would be remindful of folks to keep in mind that there is a really important case that predates ‘25, which is the Loper-Bright case from the U.S. Supreme Court in 2024. And that’s important because in the 6-3 decision on June 28th of ’24, the Supreme Court officially overruled the Chevron deference, which is a 40-year-old legal doctrine that previously required federal courts to defer to federal agencies reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous law. In other words, the courts historically had to defer to reasonable decisions made by the federal agency who was the expert on the area. That no longer is true, which I think opens up the door for court decisions in a variety of areas, including the securities laws and fraud.

Jerry: Very interesting. What about class certification? That’s obviously the Holy Grail in class actions. How did courts rule over the past 12 months in either granting or denying plaintiffs’ motions to certify a class in this space?

Hayley: Though two federal courts granted certification in part, specifically for unregistered securities claims, but they rejected certification for things like consumer protection and unjust enrichment claims, which tend to have more individualized issues.

Jerry: Also, again, it seems that those security claims are leading the charge. Let’s shift to regulations. The SEC made waves with something called Project Crypto. What should our listeners know about that?

Mauro: So, in 2025, in late ‘25, SEC Chairman Paul Atkins came out with a proposed framework, that recently, in the past couple months, had been released in an interpretive guidance. And the purpose of the Project Crypto was designed to provide more clarity, at least from the regulator’s perspective, of what is and is not a security. It’s built around, sort of, three key ideas: token taxonomy, categorizing assets like digital commodities, digital securities, digital tools, utility tokens, tokenized securities. And a temporal view of securities – that is, meaning a token might start out as a security, but not remain one forever. And tailored regulation, what the SEC refers to as fit for purpose. And that’s focusing on capital-raising activities, not necessarily crypto activities. And all of that is important for two reasons. One, the Project Crypto was in the release of the interpretive guidance a couple months ago. It was important because it was the first joint interpretive guidance on these issues issued by the CFTC and the SEC jointly. That was historic – outlining what is and is not a security, and what are these other categories. And it’s really important in order to give clarity and guidance to the markets, which will be hotly contested, no doubt, by the federal securities class action lawyers.

Jerry: Well, this sure sounds like a shift away from “everything is a security.” Where is all this heading, in your opinion?

Hayley: Though 2026 will definitely bring more litigation without a doubt, the combination of regulatory uncertainty and evolving case law is certainly fueling continued filings, Jerry.

Mauro: Yeah, and Jerry, from my perspective, you know, we’re going to see more clarity, guidance from the federal regulators, but it’s likely to result in lots of court and private litigation about that interpretive guidance. Now, I mentioned Loper for a reason, right? So that means that the courts are not really bound by whatever the SEC says or doesn’t say about what the law is. So, it’s going to be really interesting, and I think it’s going to generate a lot of litigation, because there’s a lot of money, as you put it, billions at stake, for the parties that are right on the issues.

Jerry: Well, that’s fascinating stuff, but sure feels like we’re watching an entirely new area of law being built or unfolded in real time. So thanks, Mauro and Hayley, for being here today, and thank you for loyal listeners for tuning in. Please stop by our blog for a free copy of the Digital Assets and Blockchain Class Action Review e-book.

Hayley: Thank you for having me, Jerry, and thank you, listeners.

Mauro: Thanks, everyone. Appreciate the time.