Argentina’s long-running LIBRA memecoin saga took a sharp turn after a federal court ordered the freezing of assets belonging to U.S. promoter Hayden Davis and two alleged intermediaries who handled funds after the token’s spectacular rise and crash earlier this year. The move widens a headline-grabbing case that has blended crypto speculation, politics, and cross-border investigations.
According to La Nación, Judge Marcelo Martínez de Giorgi issued the ruling to freeze movable and immovable property, plus financial assets tied to Davis and two operators suspected of acting as fiat off-ramps for crypto withdrawals. Prosecutors argued the measure is meant to prevent dissipation of funds that could be the proceeds of fraud, as the investigation tallies potential losses in the $100–$120 million range for retail investors.
The court’s order leans on a technical report from Argentina’s asset-recovery authorities and highlights a now-notorious transfer: investigators say $507,500 was sent via the Bitget exchange 42 minutes after President Javier Milei posted a selfie with Davis on January 30, presenting him as an adviser on blockchain and AI. Prosecutors described the transactions as possible “indirect payments to public officials”—a theory still under scrutiny, with no proof that funds actually reached Milei or his aides.
The newly named intermediaries—Favio Camilo Rodríguez Blanco and Orlando Rodolfo Mellino—allegedly helped convert crypto to cash and move money through safe-deposit boxes and other channels just hours after LIBRA collapsed. The order extends to platforms operating in Argentina, with regulators notified to pass the instruction through the local crypto industry.
How the Libra token blew up—and why it matters
Launched in February with marketing that framed it as a vehicle to support small businesses in Argentina, $LIBRArocketed to a multi-billion-dollar market cap after Milei amplified the project on social media—then crashed more than 90% within hours as funds poured out. Milei later deleted his promotional posts and distanced himself from the project, but the fallout set off probes in Argentina and the United States.
In the immediate aftermath, on-chain researchers flagged large outflows. Reuters reported that about $99 million was withdrawn from the token’s marketplace by wallets tied to the creator, stoking suspicions of a coordinated pump-and-dump. Davis—who has described himself as a “launch adviser”—told reporters he controlled funds to reinvest and denied wrongdoing. The episode became emblematic of politician-linked meme coins that spike on endorsements and then implode.
The United States angle added another twist: in late May, Circle froze $57.6 million in USDC across two Solana wallets linked to LIBRA’s launch, an action that transparency firm Arkham Intelligence tied to a U.S. court order amid civil claims by investors. Those wallets later drew further legal wrangling over whether the funds should remain blocked. The freezes underscored how stablecoin issuers and courts can act quickly when evidence of fraud emerges—a factor likely to weigh on future token launches.
Politics in the crosshairs—but not the final word
The scandal fueled a political firestorm in Buenos Aires, with opposition figures demanding accountability for the president’s momentary embrace of LIBRA. In June, Argentina’s Anti-Corruption Office (OA) concluded that Milei did not violate public ethics law when he promoted the token, saying he appeared to act in a personal capacity as an economist. That administrative finding didn’t halt the criminal probe, which continues to examine the token’s launch, marketing, and money flows.
Decrypt’s coverage of the new freeze stresses that the judge’s order focuses on Davis and the intermediaries, while citing prosecutors’ claim that certain transfers could constitute indirect payments. The article reiterates the Bitget timeline and notes that any freeze is preventative—meant to secure assets until the court settles the underlying case. In effect, investigators are trying to lock the barn while they trace the routes the horses took.
What happens next
With assets immobilized, attention shifts to forensic accounting—mapping wallets, CEX accounts, off-ramps, and potential beneficiaries. La Nación’s report outlines a larger money trail that includes Argentine lobbyists Mauricio Novelli and Manuel Terrones Godoy, as well as the alleged use of “cuevas” (informal cash exchanges) to obscure recipients. Parallel actions in U.S. courts and any movement by exchanges will shape how much of investors’ capital can ultimately be recovered.
For the broader market, the LIBRA case is a cautionary tale about the politics-meets-meme-coin cycle. Retail traders chased a token boosted by a head of state; insiders allegedly controlled liquidity; and when the music stopped, on-chain outflows dwarfed any real utility claims. Reuters’ contemporaneous reporting shows how quickly funds can vanish from a hyped token—long before investigations catch up. Expect regulators and platforms to tighten controls on celebrity or politician-linked launches, and for stablecoin issuers to respond faster when courts ask them to freeze suspicious balances.
Conclusion
As Argentina’s investigators unravel the LIBRA web, the case is fast becoming a playbook for how courts, exchanges, and stablecoin issuers can coordinate to lock down funds in real time. For crypto investors, the message is equally clear: DYOR isn’t enough when tokens thrive on political optics. Check who controls the treasury, who can freeze or mint, and who’s standing behind the project when volatility hits—because by the time a court order arrives, the on-chain trail may already be cold.