An Unexpected Twist in the $LIBRA Case

On July 3, 2026, Argentine Federal Judge Marcelo Martínez De Giorgi made a pivotal decision in the case of the failed cryptocurrency $LIBRA. At the request of the accused, Mauricio Novelli, the judge removed five complainants from the judicial proceedings.

The removed individuals are Juan Patricio Marchetto, Alan Vega, Matías Alejandro Paris, Braian Emanuel Quintero, and Martín Romeo. They were investors who lost money after the promotion of the digital asset by Argentine President Javier Milei on his X (formerly Twitter) account on February 14, 2025.

Why Did the Judge Remove the Complainants?

The judge accepted a motion of lack of standing presented by Novelli's defense. According to the resolution accessed by local media Infobae, the magistrate concluded that the complainants did not suffer direct harm nor did they prove ownership of the virtual wallets used to buy the cryptocurrency.

The judge highlighted that $LIBRA falls into the category of memecoins, digital assets with limited regulation, high volatility, and a value heavily dependent on market speculation.

The Complainants' Argument

Before the resolution, the complainants had rejected Novelli's motion. They argued that the backing of the Head of State was a consumed deceit, generating a sense of urgency and anxiety that clouded the investors' judgment. They introduced the concept of structural deception, claiming that the accused rented out State structures to manufacture a false appearance of legitimacy.

What Happens Next in the Investigation?

Although the investors are out of the file (the measure could be appealed before the Federal Chamber of Buenos Aires), the case is not closed. The investigation to determine if a crime occurred remains delegated to the Federal Prosecutor's Office led by Eduardo Taiano.

The central suspicion revolves around whether the creator of $LIBRA, American citizen Hayden Davis, managed to approach President Milei through Novelli and his partner Manuel Terrones Godoy (both indicted), and if this resulted in an alleged bribe payment for the President to promote the project. The resolution notes that even if the memecoin launch was agreed upon and bribes allegedly paid, this does not constitute a direct affectation to the investors in terms of their legitimacy as complainants.

Original Source: Infobae