US prosecutors are opposing an attempt by the DeFi Education Fund (DEF) to file an amicus brief in a case involving two brothers accused of exploiting the Ethereum blockchain for $25 million using maximal extractable value (MEV) bots. The case, which ended in a mistrial in November after the jury failed to reach a consensus, centers around Anton and James Peraire-Bueno, who are alleged to have used sophisticated techniques to profit from交易 order manipulation.
The U.S. government, represented by Interim U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton, submitted a letter to Judge Jessica Clarke of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, arguing against the acceptance of the DEF's brief. Prosecutors contend that the DEF's submission merely reiterates previously rejected legal arguments and does not offer any unique information relevant to the pending motion to dismiss the case against the Peraire-Bueno brothers. They further asserted that the brief is unlikely to assist the court in its consideration of the issues surrounding the motion to acquit.
The DEF, a digital asset advocacy group, filed its proposed amicus brief on December 19, expressing support for the motion to acquit or dismiss the indictment. The organization raised concerns about the broader implications of the case for the DeFi industry, arguing that such prosecutions could create ambiguity and fear among software developers, potentially stifling participation in decentralized finance and driving participants abroad. The DEF argued that the Department of Justice should not pursue indictments based on interpretations of existing law that may hinder growth by creating confusion about governing rules.
The government's stance is that the DEF's policy arguments regarding the role of validators in the industry are not relevant to the governing legal standard and that questions about digital asset policy should be addressed by Congress, not the courts. Prosecutors labeled the proposed amicus submission as "inappropriate, unhelpful to the Court, and an invitation for nullification".
Defense lawyers, however, argue that the Coin Center brief would provide a "unique perspective that will aid the Court" in understanding the prosecutors' theory of the case. They claim that the government's "honest validator theory" could potentially criminalize normal blockchain behavior, subjecting any Ethereum participant acting competitively to federal charges for "deviating from the blockchain's specifications".
The Peraire-Bueno brothers are accused of exploiting MEV, a practice where blockchain validators or traders reorder transactions within a block to gain an unfair advantage. The case has drawn significant interest from the crypto industry, with many leaders and advocacy organizations closely monitoring its implications. A guilty verdict could have far-reaching consequences for MEV-related activities and the broader DeFi space.
Following the mistrial, the U.S. government has requested a retrial, tentatively scheduled for late February or early March 2026. The decision to retry the case signals a continued aggressive push towards establishing jurisdiction over blockchain networks. If convicted, the brothers could face up to 20 years in prison for each count in the indictment.
