The Ethereum Foundation is facing a federal lawsuit from former employee Kayleen Fulton, who alleges she was fired shortly after disclosing an ovarian cancer diagnosis — a case that has placed the organization's internal management practices under scrutiny. According to the complaint, her dismissal on April 6 came just 13 days after she informed managers of her medical condition, and was also tied to an employee protest over a controversial pledge contained in the Foundation's internal mandate.

Fulton filed the lawsuit on November 4 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (complaint via CourtListener). In the filing, she alleges she was discriminated against, retaliated against, and deprived of rights related to leave for health issues. Six defendants are named: the Foundation's Swiss-based entity, its Singapore-based entity, co-founder Vitalik Buterin, executive director Bastian Aue, and two human resources companies.

Dispute Over the Foundation's Mandate

The conflict began in February, when the Foundation's board distributed a vision statement, referred to as the Mandate, which set out the organization's principles and its responsibilities toward Ethereum. According to the complaint, employee concerns centered on a provision described as the "Source Seppuku License," which included a pledge concerning suicide by sword.

A vote by 79 employees decided to strip the pledge from the Mandate, per the complaint. It nonetheless remained in the final version of the document, which was released on March 13. The pledge was incorporated into a stylized image, and executive director Bastian Aue told employees the pledge was only symbolic, according to the filing.

The conflict escalated when management required employees to sign the Mandate. Fulton and her colleague Trent Van Epps wrote a letter of protest, noting that employees could be fired for refusing to sign the document. The letter carried 53 signatures from Foundation employees.

Fulton disclosed her ovarian cancer diagnosis on March 24. One day later, she and Van Epps posted their letter. Both organizers were fired on April 6, within approximately 30 minutes of each other and without being given a reason, according to the complaint.

Disability Discrimination and Retaliation Claims

Fulton argues that the timing of her termination raises disability discrimination and retaliation concerns. She asserts that management failed to properly address her medical situation or honor her employment rights before ending her contract, and that she was a diligent employee who had never previously been disciplined.

🚨 ETHEREUM CO-FOUNDER VITALIK BUTERIN AND THE ETHEREUM FOUNDATION ARE FACING A LAWSUIT FROM A FORMER EMPLOYEE. The lawsuit alleges wrongful termination following her cancer diagnosis and workplace concerns.

— Akshay (@iiam_Akshay) November 10, 2026

The lawsuit asserts claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and other federal and state employment laws. The ADA is a U.S. civil rights statute that prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of disability, while the FMLA entitles eligible employees to unpaid, job-protected leave for serious health conditions. In the United States, health coverage is frequently tied to employment. Fulton says fear of losing her health insurance drove her to sign a separation agreement after the termination. She later opposed the agreement, stating that she withdrew her acceptance through her legal representation and refunded the money.

The Foundation's Singapore affiliate rejected those claims and said the agreement is subject to arbitration in Singapore. Arbitration is a form of private dispute resolution in which matters are heard outside the public court system.

Recorded Buterin Conversation Cited in the Filing

The lawsuit also cites a recorded discussion between Fulton and Buterin. According to the complaint, the co-founder expressed concern that allowing employees to influence the organization's decision-making by provoking disputes — whether internally or externally — could create problems. Buterin allegedly said in the discussion that rewarding employees for raising public or internal issues could set a precedent for other employees to pursue the same strategy to influence the Foundation's decisions.

The complaint does not, however, establish that Buterin personally ordered Fulton's firing.

Separately, Fulton filed an employment discrimination claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which issued a notice of right to sue on September 23. Under federal employment discrimination law, a claimant generally must obtain such a right-to-sue notice before bringing these claims in federal court. At the time the federal lawsuit was filed, an unfair labor practice claim was reportedly pending at the National Labor Relations Board.

Broader Governance Questions

The case raises broader questions about the Foundation's internal structure and its role in the development of Ethereum. Fulton previously headed Protocol Support and coordinated All Core Developers calls, where engineers discussed network upgrades; the calls are the standing venue through which Ethereum's client teams and researchers coordinate protocol changes. According to the lawsuit, her department was subsequently dismantled, and most of the signatories to the employees' letter later resigned.

The Foundation addressed its structure in a November 3 blog post, which emphasized Ethereum's open-source nature and its independence from control by any single entity. The post pointed to applications of Ethereum in Bhutan's digital identity system and in humanitarian aid as examples of that institutional independence.

The lawsuit arrives after recent changes to the Foundation's internal structure that have drawn attention across the Ethereum ecosystem. According to a BeInCrypto report, ETH rose approximately 5% following the Mandate's release in March, and later fell nearly 7% around a June announcement of a workforce reduction at the Foundation amounting to roughly 20%. Those price moves do not prove any causal connection to Foundation decisions, but they illustrate how organizational news can become part of market coverage.

The next major question is whether the Colorado court will allow the case to proceed in the U.S. or accept the arguments about arbitration. Until then, the discrimination and retaliation allegations remain unsubstantiated, and the defendants will have the opportunity to contest them through the legal process.