Circle Shareholder Sues Trump and Affiliates Over $2 Billion Foreign Crypto Deal

A shareholder of Circle Internet Financial, the company behind the USDC stablecoin, has filed a lawsuit against US President Donald Trump, his family’s crypto firm World Liberty Financial, related entities, and US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff over a $2 billion transaction involving a foreign government and Binance.
On Thursday, in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, Circle shareholder J. Benjamin Greenberg accused Trump, Witkoff, and World Liberty of harming Circle by enabling foreign governments to transfer funds through the Trump family’s USD1 stablecoin. Greenberg described this as “brazen corruption” that hindered Circle’s ability to compete in the stablecoin market with USDC.
At the core of the allegations is MGX, an Abu Dhabi company linked to the UAE royal family, which invested $2 billion in the crypto exchange Binance using the USD1 stablecoin in 2025. Earlier reports indicated another investment firm supported by Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan agreed to acquire a 49% stake in World Liberty for $500 million.
Greenberg claims the President and his businesses diverted hundreds of millions of dollars in business away from Circle by accepting funds from a foreign government. He stated,
Greenberg, who owns 10,000 ordinary shares of Circle, initiated the lawsuit partly due to this stake. He argues that Trump violated the US Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause through these crypto deals and seeks court orders to ban Trump and Witkoff from engaging in similar transactions without Congressional approval.
Zach Witkoff, son of the defendant Steve Witkoff, co-founded World Liberty along with Trump and his three sons, who are also co-founders of the crypto venture.
A spokesperson for Circle told Cointelegraph that the company "did not initiate, direct, authorize, or participate in the filing" and declined to comment on the ongoing lawsuit. Representatives from World Liberty and the White House did not respond to requests for comment.
Leading up to the 2026 midterm elections—with some states already voting—Democratic candidates are emphasizing allegations of "corruption" related to Trump’s involvement in crypto projects. According to Public Citizen, Trump’s family crypto ventures reportedly earned him $1.4 billion in 2025 but resulted in $4.7 billion in investor losses, contributing to broader concerns about his controversial business dealings.
Less than two weeks before the midterms, Democrats are leveraging Trump’s crypto deals as a campaign issue to galvanize voters. Recently, Senator Mark Warner released a campaign ad highlighting that Trump earned over $600 million solely from a crypto memecoin. This tactic aims to sway public opinion in favor of Democratic candidates amid mounting scrutiny of the president’s financial activities.
Democrats are using the lawsuit and associated corruption claims as part of their political strategy to highlight ethical concerns around Trump’s crypto ventures, which could influence voter decisions in the upcoming midterm elections. The case underscores tensions over foreign influence and the integrity of digital currency markets.
The significance lies in its potential impact on the cryptocurrency industry’s regulatory landscape and the political repercussions for Trump and his affiliates, as well as questions over foreign investments in US digital assets. The lawsuit reflects growing scrutiny over crypto transactions involving political figures and foreign governments.
The lawsuit illustrates how crypto projects tied to political figures can become focal points for legal and ethical challenges, potentially reshaping governance norms and investor confidence in stablecoins and related financial instruments.
Why it matters
The lawsuit spotlights concerns over foreign influence and constitutional violations in crypto markets tied to political leaders, highlighting broader regulatory and electoral implications.
Prepared from the source material with AI-assisted editing and checked against the supplied facts.
Open original source ↗