The Rise of SLAPPs and Their Impact on Crypto Investment Risk and Legal Due Diligence

The cryptocurrency industry, long characterized by its rapid innovation and regulatory ambiguity, has entered a new phase marked by aggressive legal tactics aimed at silencing critics and obscuring accountability. Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) have emerged as a tool for crypto projects and actors to deter adverse publicity, often at the expense of investor trust and market transparency. As the sector grapples with these challenges, the interplay between legal risk, reputational damage, and investor confidence has become a critical focal point for both innovators and regulators.

The Proliferation of SLAPPs in Crypto

SLAPPs, which leverage litigation to intimidate critics and stifle free speech, have found fertile ground in the crypto space. A 2023 lawsuit against Andreas M. Antonopoulos Inc., for instance, alleged the company exploited the public figure's name to promote misleading trading boot camps, illustrating how legal threats can be weaponized to deflect scrutiny. Similarly, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) v. Ripple case underscored broader tensions between enforcement and clarity, as the court's rulings on whether crypto exchanges qualify as securities under federal law created a ripple effect across the industry.

These lawsuits often exploit the ambiguity of securities law, particularly the Howey test, to challenge the classification of digital assets. Courts in the Second Circuit have clarified that decentralized exchanges are less likely to face liability under Section 12(a)(1) of the Securities Act compared to centralized counterparts.

However, the lack of consistent judicial standards has left many projects vulnerable to opportunistic litigation, further complicating compliance efforts.

Erosion of Investor Trust

The impact of SLAPPs on investor trust is profound. By creating a climate of fear and confusion, these lawsuits deter both retail and institutional investors from engaging with crypto markets. A 2025 report by the Financial Stability Board (FSB) noted that inconsistent regulatory enforcement-often exacerbated by SLAPP-like tactics-has reinforced perceptions that industry actors prioritize silencing critics over fostering transparency.

High-profile cases, such as the collapse of Terraform Labs and the FTX scandal, have amplified these concerns. The $4.5 billion civil penalty imposed on Terraform Labs for fraudulent practices highlighted the reputational and financial risks of poorly managed projects. Meanwhile, the FTX collapse and Sam Bankman-Fried's conviction underscored systemic vulnerabilities, particularly in custody and compliance practices. These events have not only eroded trust but also prompted calls for stricter regulatory frameworks to protect investors.

Legal Due Diligence as a Mitigation Strategy

In response to these risks, crypto projects have increasingly prioritized legal due diligence to navigate the evolving regulatory landscape. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has signaled a more nuanced approach to digital assets, emphasizing that regulatory violations are not automatically criminalized unless there is evidence of willfulness. This shift has encouraged projects to document their lack of intent and decentralization to shield themselves from enforcement actions.

Key strategies include:
1. Decentralization Documentation: Projects must clearly distinguish between decentralized and custodial models. Decentralized platforms, which do not hold user assets, are less likely to face liability under securities laws.
2. AML/KYC Compliance: Robust Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know-Your-Customer (KYC) protocols are essential to mitigate enforcement risks. The DOJ has indicated that developers of truly decentralized software will not be charged under 18 U.S.C. § 1960(b)(1)(C) if there is no evidence of criminal intent.
3. Legislative Preparedness: With the passage of the GENIUS Act and ongoing debates over the Clarity Act, projects must anticipate future regulatory shifts and align their operations accordingly.

Case Studies: Lessons from the Frontlines

Several case studies illustrate the real-world implications of SLAPPs and the efficacy of risk mitigation strategies. The SEC v. Ripple Labs case, which spanned years, ultimately led to a settlement that clarified the agency's stance on digital asset classification. Similarly, Coinbase's shareholder lawsuit over a data breach and regulatory compliance failure highlighted the importance of transparency in custodial operations.

Conversely, the Grayscale vs. SEC battle culminated in the approval of spot Bitcoin ETFs in 2024, marking a turning point for institutional adoption. This outcome demonstrated how proactive legal strategies-such as challenging regulatory barriers-can yield positive investor outcomes.

Conclusion

The rise of SLAPPs in the crypto industry underscores the urgent need for robust legal frameworks and investor due diligence. While regulatory uncertainty persists, projects that prioritize transparency, decentralization, and compliance are better positioned to mitigate reputational and legal risks. For investors, the lessons from recent cases are clear: understanding the regulatory status of crypto assets and the legal strategies of projects is essential to navigating this high-stakes landscape. As the industry evolves, the balance between innovation and accountability will remain a defining challenge.