Connect with us

News

Celsius founder Alex Mashinsky sentenced to 12 years in prison

Published

on

Celsius founder Alex Mashinsky sentenced to 12 years in prison

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Alex Mashinsky, founder of collapsed crypto lender Celsius Network, was sentenced to 12 years in prison after admitting his role in a scheme to defraud customers and manipulate a token using customer funds.

Mashinsky pleaded guilty to securities fraud and commodities fraud in December. Federal prosecutors in New York said he lured customers with promises of high returns on digital deposits, while misleading them about Celsius’s operations and using their deposits to drive up the price of its own crypto token, CEL.

At its peak, Celsius held $25bn in customer assets. But the bank was buffeted by volatility in crypto markets in 2022, and hundreds of thousands of clients were unable to recover their funds after it halted withdrawals.

Advertisement

District Judge John Koeltl of the Southern District of New York sentenced 59-year-old Mashinsky on Thursday. Mashinsky previously agreed to forfeit more than $48mn, representing his personal proceeds from the sale of CEL tokens before it crashed. His bank accounts were frozen by US authorities after his indictment in 2023.

The sentencing comes as US President Donald Trump has courted the crypto industry, launched his own token and softened the administration’s approach to enforcement and oversight of digital assets. In March he pardoned the company behind the crypto exchange BitMEX — which last year pleaded guilty to violating the Bank Secrecy Act in relation to anti money-laundering controls. In addition, new justice department policies prohibit prosecution of crypto companies for the actions of their users.

“The case for tokenisation and the use of digital assets is strong but it is not a licence to deceive,” Jay Clayton, US attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a statement. “The rules against fraud still apply, and the SDNY will hold those who flout them accountable for their crimes.” 

Prosecutors had asked for a 20-year prison term, saying in a filing last month that Mashinsky was “a fraudster of epic proportions” and that “a severe sentence is warranted”. 

Mashinsky told a court in December that “what I did was wrong and I want to do what I can to make it right” and said he accepted full responsibility for his actions. 

Advertisement

In a court filing last week, Mashinsky said the sentence should be no more than 366 days. He accused the government of making a “venom-laced submission” to the court and said he was a “first time, non-violent offender who pleaded guilty and accepts responsibility”. 

The filing said he was “chastened and humbled” and was “tortured every day by his misdeeds and the pain he caused”. 

Mashinsky was arrested and charged in 2023. His company had filed for bankruptcy the previous year, after a crypto market rout. 

Prosecutors said Mashinsky had presented Celsius as a “modern day bank” but that it had been a “risky investment fund”, and that Celsius had used some customers’ money to manipulate the market for its CEL token, allowing it to sell its own holdings above their market value. 

Advertisement

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

Published

on

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.

“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.

“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.

In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.

“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.

Advertisement

Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.

This story has been updated.

Continue Reading

Trending