
Custodia Bank's Supreme Court bid to force Fed master-account access gets a major amicus push. The Blockchain Association says the Monetary Control Act makes eligibility a right, not a privilege.
The Blockchain Association filed an amicus brief with the US Supreme Court on Aug. 13, 2026, backing Custodia Bank's petition to overturn a lower-court ruling that gave the Federal Reserve wide discretion to deny master accounts to state-chartered banks. The industry group argues that the Monetary Control Act of 1980 mandates Fed services for eligible institutions, making access a statutory right rather than a privilege the central bank can grant or withhold at will.
Custodia, a Wyoming-chartered special-purpose depository institution, applied for a master account in October 2020. The Kansas City Federal Reserve denied the application in January 2023, citing risks tied to Custodia's digital-asset business model. Custodia sued, lost, and had its rehearing request denied in March 2026. It then petitioned the Supreme Court on July 10-11, 2026.
A master account is the gateway to Fedwire and the Automated Clearing House network – the plumbing that moves trillions of dollars each day. Without one, a bank must route payments through a correspondent, adding cost and counterparty risk. The case does not involve crypto tokens or blockchain transactions. The fight is about access to conventional payment infrastructure.
The Blockchain Association's brief, filed under docket 26-62, frames the Fed's denial as a template for systematic exclusion. If the central bank can block master accounts at its own discretion and courts defer to that judgment, any state-chartered bank serving an industry the Fed views unfavorably faces the same barrier, the group said.
State-chartered banks willing to serve crypto companies are scarce. Silvergate and Signature, the two institutions that most aggressively served the digital-asset sector, both collapsed in 2023.
Congress has been working through stablecoin legislation and a broader digital-asset market-structure framework. Both assume crypto-adjacent banks will have a functional path to payment-system access. The case cuts to the heart of that assumption.
The Kansas City Federal Reserve received an extension to respond to the amicus brief by Sept. 11, 2026. The Supreme Court has not said whether it will take the case. If it does, the decision would resolve a question that lower courts have answered inconsistently and that lawmakers have never addressed directly: whether access to the payment system is a right for eligible banks or a privilege the central bank can extend or withhold.
The broader risk, if the Court declines to hear Custodia's appeal, is that the Fed's lower-court win stands as binding precedent in the Tenth Circuit. That would make it harder for other state-chartered digital-asset banks to challenge future denials, the Blockchain Association's brief argues.
Drafted by a large language model from the source reporting linked above, then screened by automated publishing checks. It is not read by a journalist before publication. Some articles cite our Alpha Score. Verify prices and figures against the original source. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.