Key Takeaways
- • Circle, a $17 billion USDC stablecoin issuer, faces a Wisconsin misdemeanor charge of obstruction of justice for refusing to comply with a court order to recover approximately 381,000 stolen tokens ($1.2 million) from a romance scam victim.
- • Wisconsin prosecutors allege Circle defied a December 2025 court warrant ordering the firm to "burn and reissue" 119 million frozen USDC tokens to law enforcement, citing technical limitations and lack of jurisdiction as its defense.
- • The dispute exposes a critical gap in stablecoin issuer responsibility: Tether, the largest stablecoin operator, has frozen approximately $4.7 billion in crime-linked assets and possesses the technical capability to burn and reissue tokens, whereas Circle claims such operations exceed its authority.
- • Law enforcement reports diminished recovery success rates, with Milwaukee County detective Scott Simons documenting over a dozen cases where Circle declined freeze requests or where orders arrived too late to prevent fund transfers.
- • FBI data shows crypto fraud losses reached a record $11.4 billion in 2025, with more than 18,500 victims suffering losses exceeding $100,000 each, underscoring pressure on stablecoin issuers to enhance victim recovery protocols.
Summary
Wisconsin prosecutors have filed a criminal complaint against Circle Internet Financial, the issuer of USD Coin (USDC), alleging the stablecoin operator intentionally violated a court warrant to recover stolen funds from a local scam victim. The misdemeanor charge of obstruction of justice centers on Circle's alleged refusal to comply with a December 2025 court order requiring the firm to invalidate and reissue approximately 119 million frozen USDC tokens to the sheriff's office following a romance scam that defrauded a Walworth County resident of roughly $1.2 million.
The underlying case originated when a resident received an unsolicited text in May 2025 from a scammer posing as a romantic interest and directing part of his savings into USDC through a fraudulent investment platform. A county court ordered Circle to freeze the tokens in August 2025, which the firm initially complied with. However, when a judge subsequently ordered Circle to burn the stolen tokens and reissue equivalent value directly to law enforcement, Circle refused. The firm contends in its motion to dismiss that the charge is meritless, citing technical limitations in its capabilities and lack of jurisdictional authority to execute such operations.
The case highlights a significant operational and legal divide among stablecoin issuers regarding victim restitution responsibilities. Tether, operator of USDT, the largest stablecoin by market capitalization, has demonstrated willingness to honor law enforcement freeze requests without requiring court orders and maintains technical capability to burn tokens and issue replacements. Tether reports having frozen approximately $4.7 billion in crime-linked assets. Circle's resistance contrasts sharply with this standard, creating uncertainty for law enforcement and fraud victims seeking asset recovery.
Law enforcement officials report growing frustration with Circle's cooperation levels. Milwaukee County detective Scott Simons documented over a dozen cases in which Circle declined freeze requests or where orders arrived too late to prevent unauthorized transfers. Walworth County prosecutor Thomas Binger noted in filings that "the tools that are at our disposal are not keeping up with the tools the criminals are using," reflecting the escalating sophistication of AI-driven fraud schemes.
The legal pressure on Circle emerges amid record cryptocurrency fraud losses. The FBI documented $11.4 billion in crypto fraud losses during 2025, with more than 18,500 victims each losing over $100,000. The complaint underscores whether stablecoin issuers can claim technical or jurisdictional limits when law enforcement presents court-backed recovery orders, a question that may reshape regulatory expectations for the broader stablecoin industry.
The underlying case originated when a resident received an unsolicited text in May 2025 from a scammer posing as a romantic interest and directing part of his savings into USDC through a fraudulent investment platform. A county court ordered Circle to freeze the tokens in August 2025, which the firm initially complied with. However, when a judge subsequently ordered Circle to burn the stolen tokens and reissue equivalent value directly to law enforcement, Circle refused. The firm contends in its motion to dismiss that the charge is meritless, citing technical limitations in its capabilities and lack of jurisdictional authority to execute such operations.
The case highlights a significant operational and legal divide among stablecoin issuers regarding victim restitution responsibilities. Tether, operator of USDT, the largest stablecoin by market capitalization, has demonstrated willingness to honor law enforcement freeze requests without requiring court orders and maintains technical capability to burn tokens and issue replacements. Tether reports having frozen approximately $4.7 billion in crime-linked assets. Circle's resistance contrasts sharply with this standard, creating uncertainty for law enforcement and fraud victims seeking asset recovery.
Law enforcement officials report growing frustration with Circle's cooperation levels. Milwaukee County detective Scott Simons documented over a dozen cases in which Circle declined freeze requests or where orders arrived too late to prevent unauthorized transfers. Walworth County prosecutor Thomas Binger noted in filings that "the tools that are at our disposal are not keeping up with the tools the criminals are using," reflecting the escalating sophistication of AI-driven fraud schemes.
The legal pressure on Circle emerges amid record cryptocurrency fraud losses. The FBI documented $11.4 billion in crypto fraud losses during 2025, with more than 18,500 victims each losing over $100,000. The complaint underscores whether stablecoin issuers can claim technical or jurisdictional limits when law enforcement presents court-backed recovery orders, a question that may reshape regulatory expectations for the broader stablecoin industry.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.