- Justin Sun reports that WLFI has frozen 2.94 billion tokens and revoked voting rights.
- A lawsuit filed after failing to resolve the dispute privately.
- WLFI has implemented a Governance concept that will lock tokens to unauthorized parties.
Justin Sun filed a lawsuit in federal court in California against World Liberty Financial (WLFI), claiming that the service froze his holdings of 2.94 billion WLFI tokens and deprived him of important business rights without reason.
The move deepens the growing conflict between the most prominent crypto traders and a project that has positioned itself on a decentralized governance and early-stage distribution system.
In his voice in publicSun confirmed that he wants legal protection of his rights as a WLFI token holder.
Sun also stressed that the lawsuit will not change his political stance or his support for Trump’s pro-crypto administration. According to him, the dispute is about investor support and trademark control, not politics.
Tokens are frozen and voting rights are revoked
At the heart of the case is Sun’s claim that WLFI has frozen all of its 2.94 billion tokens (540 million unlocked tokens and 2.4 billion locked tokens). He says that this made it impossible for him to transfer, sell, or use his property.
The value of the product has dropped from $107 million in September 2025, when it was frozen, to about $43-$60 million by April 2026.
The Sun also claims that WLFI has removed its voting rights tied to the signs. This means that they have not been able to participate in the main decisions that affect the process, including the recent changes in governance introduced by the project team.
The Sun also reports that WLFI continued to freeze its premises and threatened to destroy part of its assets by “burning”.
According to him, this was done without any valid reason and without giving him an opportunity to respond.
He said he tried to resolve the matter privately with WLFI before taking action. However, he says the project team refused to restore access to his tokens or restore his control rights, leaving him with no choice but to go to court.
The sun has explained its position directly: it wants to be treated in the same way as the other first recipients of WLFI tokens, without special privileges and without restrictions that are not used in the same way.
Justin Sun also disagrees with WLFI’s concept of Governance
A legal dispute comes along with disagreements over a Comments on WLFI’s authority was released on April 15.
The Sun has publicly opposed this idea, saying that it creates conditions that can block users’ tokens forever if they do not actively accept the new terms.
Proposals also include having 10% of advisor tokens permanently burned. It also shows the structure of the initial purchase tokens that includes a two-year slide followed by a two-year cycle.
Under the same policy, users who do not expressly agree to the new terms may have their tokens permanently disabled.
Sun has raised concerns that this creates an inconsistent system where business rights are dependent on a license to operate later. He also mentioned the structural conflict in his experience.
Because his symptoms are currently frozen, he says he cannot vote or oppose the petition, even though he is directly involved.
This has added another dimension to the debate, as participation in governance is seen as a key element in token-based systems.
World Liberty Financial (WLFI).
WLFI has disputed Sun’s claims, saying the token restrictions were implemented due to internal concerns about security and compliance.
The project ensures that its operational procedures include controls that can be used to protect the platform and its stakeholders.
The disagreement reflects a deep misunderstanding in crypto governance, especially in projects that market themselves as decentralized while still maintaining regulatory aspects such as token cooling or oversight of administrators.
The Sun case focuses on whether such controls were properly disclosed and whether they could be used against early investors without proper protection.
With 2.94 billion tokens at the center of the dispute, the outcome could affect how regulatory authorities and business rights are interpreted in similar life forms moving forward.
