According to a new report, civil fraud judges are taking more active measures to freeze and recover stolen crypto. As federal enforcement diminishes, retail traders are looking to new sources of protection. Still, this trend is not enough to solve the problem. These judges struggle to cope with today’s crime wave and aren’t familiar with Web3 technology. Scammers can persuade them to desist their efforts. Civil Judges Fight Crypto Fraud President Trump has left a huge impact on Web3 markets, but his war on federal crypto enforcement might prove to be the most consequential. One recent example highlights the reductions: today, Trump withdrew his nominee for CFTC Chair, even though the Commission only has one sitting member. In this environment, ordinary judges are having to handle more responsibilities that were previously under Uncle Sam’s purview. That is, according to a new report, judges presiding over civil fraud cases are being asked to freeze more stolen crypto than ever before: “People are desperately trying to figure out ways to recover [stolen] assets, and the Justice Department doesn’t have the resources to go after these cases. Attorneys are able to see the crypto transfers, but actually getting your hands on it and getting it back is an entirely different story,” claimed Scott Armstrong, a former federal crypto prosecutor. Many of these cases don’t involve institutional actors, only defrauded individuals trying to recover lost tokens. Private companies are reluctant to aid community sleuths, and the DOJ eased investigations against money laundering platforms. Judges might be these investors’ best hope to freeze or recover their crypto. An Insufficient Fix Still, this solution is wholly unsuited to tackling such a problem for a variety of reasons. Put simply, it’s an enormous issue, and civil fraud judges don’t have the training or capacity to solve it. One recent example highlights the dilemma quite nicely. Hayden Davis, promoter of the infamous LIBRA meme coin, recently convinced a federal judge to lift the freeze on his crypto wallets. His lawyers argued that the “intangible, fast-moving, and opaque nature of cryptocurrencies” caused a new danger: if these tokens stay frozen for too long, their value will totally dissipate. The judge acquiesced to this request, and Davis allegedly participated in another crypto scam less than a week later. These people were trained to understand the law, not blockchain technology. Moreover, they have a lot of responsibilities other than crypto crime. If we ask them to shoulder the burden of enforcement, it won’t always work out. All that is to say, retail traders are under attack from constant hacks and fraud. It’ll take more than the uncoordinated efforts of sympathetic judges to guarantee crypto restitution. We urgently need to find and implement a more effective technique.According to a new report, civil fraud judges are taking more active measures to freeze and recover stolen crypto. As federal enforcement diminishes, retail traders are looking to new sources of protection. Still, this trend is not enough to solve the problem. These judges struggle to cope with today’s crime wave and aren’t familiar with Web3 technology. Scammers can persuade them to desist their efforts. Civil Judges Fight Crypto Fraud President Trump has left a huge impact on Web3 markets, but his war on federal crypto enforcement might prove to be the most consequential. One recent example highlights the reductions: today, Trump withdrew his nominee for CFTC Chair, even though the Commission only has one sitting member. In this environment, ordinary judges are having to handle more responsibilities that were previously under Uncle Sam’s purview. That is, according to a new report, judges presiding over civil fraud cases are being asked to freeze more stolen crypto than ever before: “People are desperately trying to figure out ways to recover [stolen] assets, and the Justice Department doesn’t have the resources to go after these cases. Attorneys are able to see the crypto transfers, but actually getting your hands on it and getting it back is an entirely different story,” claimed Scott Armstrong, a former federal crypto prosecutor. Many of these cases don’t involve institutional actors, only defrauded individuals trying to recover lost tokens. Private companies are reluctant to aid community sleuths, and the DOJ eased investigations against money laundering platforms. Judges might be these investors’ best hope to freeze or recover their crypto. An Insufficient Fix Still, this solution is wholly unsuited to tackling such a problem for a variety of reasons. Put simply, it’s an enormous issue, and civil fraud judges don’t have the training or capacity to solve it. One recent example highlights the dilemma quite nicely. Hayden Davis, promoter of the infamous LIBRA meme coin, recently convinced a federal judge to lift the freeze on his crypto wallets. His lawyers argued that the “intangible, fast-moving, and opaque nature of cryptocurrencies” caused a new danger: if these tokens stay frozen for too long, their value will totally dissipate. The judge acquiesced to this request, and Davis allegedly participated in another crypto scam less than a week later. These people were trained to understand the law, not blockchain technology. Moreover, they have a lot of responsibilities other than crypto crime. If we ask them to shoulder the burden of enforcement, it won’t always work out. All that is to say, retail traders are under attack from constant hacks and fraud. It’ll take more than the uncoordinated efforts of sympathetic judges to guarantee crypto restitution. We urgently need to find and implement a more effective technique.