Argentina: Judge Drops $Libra Fraud Case Against Milei

Federal Judge Marcelo Martinez de Giorgi dismissed the criminal investigation into Argentine President Javier Milei and his sister, Karina Milei. The ruling ended a probe into a cryptocurrency scandal that had persisted for nearly two years. Court records indicate the judge accepted the prosecutors' request to close the file.

In the decision, Judge Martinez de Giorgi stated that the reported events did not fall under a specific legal category. The judge concluded that no criminally relevant deception had been proven by the evidence presented during the investigation.

The legal dispute began in February 2025 when President Milei posted about a new cryptocoin called $Libra on the social media platform X. The post claimed the coin would help fund small businesses and start-ups and included a direct link for users to purchase it. Following the post, the price of the asset climbed sharply.

Within hours, the president deleted the social media post. The value of the coin subsequently plunged, causing most investors to lose a large portion of their capital. The sharp drop in value triggered immediate political backlash, with opposition members of Congress planning impeachment proceedings. Online critics described the move as a rug pull, a tactic where promoters attract buyers and then halt trading to keep the raised funds.

President Milei has maintained that he did not promote the coin but merely shared it. In an interview with Todo Noticias, he stated, "I didn't promote it, I merely shared it." He described his actions as being in good faith while the coin's value was rising. The presidential office noted that Milei had no involvement in the development of $Libra.

To explain the deletion of the post, Milei said he did not know the details of the project initially. After learning more about the scheme, he decided not to continue promoting it. In a television interview, he argued that investors put money into $Libra voluntarily and understood the associated risks.

The Anti-Corruption Office announced at the start of the controversy that it would examine whether the president had acted improperly. As of the original report, the president had not responded to news of the dismissal.