Elizabeth Warren Rebuts Defamation Allegations from Changpeng Zhao Through Lawyer

Senator Elizabeth Warren’s lawyer has pushed back against defamation allegations made by Binance founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, insisting that the Senator’s comments about his criminal plea were “true in all respects.”

The rebuttal came in a letter obtained by Punchbowl News, marking the latest clash between the U.S. Senate’s most outspoken crypto critic and one of the industry’s most polarizing figures.

The Origin of the Dispute

The feud began shortly after President Trump’s pardon of CZ, who had been convicted on charges related to violations of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) — the primary U.S. anti–money laundering law.

Following the pardon, Warren posted on X that CZ had “pleaded guilty to a criminal money laundering charge.”

That statement prompted CZ’s attorney, Teresa Goody Guillén, to accuse Warren of defamation and threaten legal action if she did not issue a retraction.

“Mr. Zhao will not remain silent while a United States Senator seemingly misuses the office to repeatedly publish defamatory statements that impugn his reputation,” Goody Guillén wrote in her initial letter.

Warren’s Legal Response

In her formal reply, Warren’s lawyer Ben Stafford dismissed the defamation claim entirely, asserting that the Senator’s statement was “completely accurate and not made with malice.”

“Senator Warren accurately represented publicly available and widely reported facts,” Stafford wrote.

“Mr. Zhao pled guilty to a criminal charge, presented through an information by the Department of Justice, and resulting in a prison sentence.”

Stafford’s letter further noted that CZ’s plea to a violation of the Bank Secrecy Act was, by definition, a criminal offense, and not a mere “regulatory violation.”

“Regulatory penalties do not exist,” Stafford argued, citing the BSA as “our nation’s first and most comprehensive anti-money laundering statute.”

The Legal Context

In November 2023, CZ pleaded guilty to failing to maintain an effective anti-money laundering program under the BSA, part of a $4.3 billion settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice.

He stepped down as Binance CEO as part of the plea deal and served a brief sentence before receiving a presidential pardon this fall.

While CZ maintains that his guilty plea did not amount to a “money laundering charge,” Warren’s team contends that the criminal statute itself was created to prevent and punish money laundering — making her statement factually correct.

Stafford’s letter also pointed out that, even if the statement were challenged, Warren’s speech is heavily protected under constitutional and legislative immunity standards.

Why It Matters

This dispute underscores the deep divide between Washington lawmakers and the crypto industry — a divide that has widened as policymakers seek stricter oversight of digital assets.

Warren, a leading Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, has built her political brand around consumer protection and financial regulation.

CZ, by contrast, has become a global symbol of crypto’s resistance to government control — and a frequent target of regulatory scrutiny.

The confrontation between the two reflects the larger narrative of accountability versus innovation, and it’s playing out in real time between the highest levels of power in government and crypto.

Final Thought

Whether or not CZ pursues a defamation lawsuit, Warren’s letter signals that she’s not backing down from her hardline stance on crypto regulation.

For the industry, it’s another reminder that political heat isn’t cooling off anytime soon.

And for both sides — crypto’s rebels and its regulators — the fight for legitimacy is far from over.

🧠 If you found this story insightful, follow for more coverage on crypto regulation, global markets, and the clash between innovation and law.

💬 Do you think Elizabeth Warren went too far — or was she just stating the facts?