Court Says Fed Can Play Favorites: Crypto Bank Loses Master Account Battle!

by

A US appeals court has rejected crypto-focused Custodia Bank’s request to reopen its legal fight with the Federal Reserve over access to the US banking system.

On March 13, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals voted 7-3 against rehearing the case-because democracy and a nice round number. That means an earlier October ruling remains in place, where the court decided Federal Reserve banks can pick and choose who gets to play in the banking sandbox like it’s a VIP lounge at a disco.

Those accounts, called “master accounts,” let banks connect directly to the Fed’s payment system. Without one, a bank must rely on another bank to move money. Imagine trying to order a pizza but needing a middleman to tell the pizzeria you exist. Absurd? No more absurd than the Fed’s standards, apparently.

🚨NEW: The 10th Circuit has rejected @custodiabank’s request for a full court rehearing in its master account fight with the @federalreserve, after a panel ruled in October that Reserve Banks have legal discretion to deny master account access.

Active judges voted 7-3 against… because nothing says “justice” like a 7-3 split and a side of popcorn.

– Eleanor Terrett (@EleanorTerrett) March 13, 2026

Custodia, a Wyoming-chartered digital asset bank, has tried to obtain such an account since 2020. The bank claims direct access would let it offer payment services for crypto firms without involving traditional banks. Sounds noble. Until the Fed said, “Nope,” in 2023, citing “safety and stability” concerns. Translation: “We’re scared of your shiny digital rocks.”

Custodia then sued the Fed, arguing that US law requires the central bank to give access to legally chartered banks. But courts have repeatedly sided with the Fed, because nothing says “progress” like a benevolent dictatorship with a clipboard.

– Custodia Bank ™ (@custodiabank) March 4, 2026

Friday’s decision keeps that position intact. The appeals court panel said the Fed still has discretion to approve or deny applications. In other words, the Fed’s final answer is “maybe,” and your homework is to cry into a pillow.

Not all judges agreed. In a dissent, Judges Timothy Tymkovich and Allison Eid warned that the ruling gives Reserve Banks too much unchecked power to block state-chartered banks. Their dissent was about as effective as a screen door on a submarine.

For now, the decision is a setback for Custodia and other crypto-focused banks seeking direct access to the US financial system. Which is ironic, because the only thing less accessible than the Fed’s system is a banker’s sense of humor when it comes to crypto.

Read More

2026-03-13 22:06