The supplied flash says Federal Judge Marcelo Martínez de Giorgi found that conduct investigated in Argentina's $LIBRA case did not amount to fraud. But later Buenos Aires Herald reporting describes a narrower move: removing five private complainants from the criminal case on standing and individualized-harm grounds, which means the headline claim that Javier Milei and Karina Milei were fully acquitted is not firmly established by the available evidence.

What the Judge's Ruling Appears to Cover

The safest reading is narrower than the original headline. The flash frames the development as a fraud-related judicial finding by Martínez de Giorgi, but it does not provide a ruling date, case number, procedural label, or court text showing that Milei, Karina Milei, and the other named individuals were formally acquitted.

Buenos Aires Herald search-result excerpts point to something more specific: a decision removing five private complainants from the $LIBRA criminal case after a request by defendants Mauricio Novelli and Manuel Terrones Godoy. In that account, the judge found the complainants had not shown sufficiently specific, direct, and individualized harm, and that ownership of the relevant virtual wallets had not been established.

That matters because a ruling on who can participate as a complainant is not the same thing as a final merits judgment on whether every investigated person committed fraud. The flash's language may reflect the judge's view of the fraud theory, but the currently available reporting does not firmly establish a confirmed across-the-board acquittal.

Why the Argentina Case May Still Continue

The reported ruling does not clearly end legal risk on its own. In the Herald's account, removing the five complainants would mean those investors no longer have access to the case file and can no longer request new evidence, concentrating procedural control with prosecutor Eduardo Taiano.

That change could weaken pressure inside the case, but it is still different from proving the criminal matter is over. The same Herald reporting says the complainants appealed, and a later excerpt says Taiano was still gathering information for an asset-discovery process on May 13, 2026, with the investigation focused on Milei, Karina Milei, Sergio Morales, Mauricio Novelli, and Manuel Terrones Godoy.

So the practical answer to the main reader question is no: the reported Argentine court development may narrow the case and reduce one avenue of pressure, but it does not yet support saying all legal exposure has ended for Milei or the other named figures.

How the U.S. Lawsuit Differs From the Argentina Probe

The U.S. angle should not be treated as the same legal track. The available U.S. material points to a separate civil class action involving $LIBRA, $M3M3, Hayden Davis, Kelsier Ventures, and Meteora, rather than the same proceeding as Argentina's criminal investigation.

Burwick Law described that case as asserting fraud, conspiracy, RICO, New York consumer-law, and unjust-enrichment claims. A later Tangem report said a New York federal court dismissed that class action with prejudice, but no court order was supplied here, so that status remains attributed reporting rather than primary confirmation.

The result is a cross-border picture with different forums, different claims, and potentially different outcomes. Even if the U.S. civil case was dismissed, that would not by itself settle the separate Argentine criminal question.