A popular meme-token launch platform is facing renewed legal pressure after plaintiffs accused it of failing to stop a wave of online harassment and intimidation tied to an ongoing federal lawsuit.

In a court filing submitted over the weekend, attorneys representing users suing the platform asked a New York federal judge to consider sanctions, alleging that individuals connected to the platform’s promotional ecosystem used meme tokens and online posts to threaten lawyers, plaintiffs, and their families.

The filing claims that during key stages of the litigation, digital tokens circulated on the platform included violent imagery, personal information, and messages aimed at discouraging participation in the lawsuit. Attorneys argue that the activity escalated beyond online mockery into conduct raising concerns over physical safety.

According to the motion, some tokens featured graphic or threatening language directed at legal counsel, while others targeted plaintiffs by embedding private details and inflammatory content. The plaintiffs say these campaigns coincided with heightened attention around the case and were amplified by individuals with alleged ties to the platform’s affiliate or promoter network.

The lawsuit itself accuses the platform of operating an unregistered digital marketplace that encouraged speculative trading through meme-based tokens. Plaintiffs claim the system functioned less like a neutral technology service and more like a high-risk gambling environment disguised as innovation.

While the platform has removed certain offensive content in the past, the filing argues that similar tokens continued to appear afterward, suggesting the company had the ability to intervene but failed to apply consistent safeguards.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs are asking the court to order the removal of all content referencing parties to the case, appoint an independent monitor to oversee compliance, and require disclosures identifying those responsible for the alleged harassment.

The company and its executives have denied wrongdoing and are seeking dismissal of the underlying lawsuit. They argue they are not responsible for independent user behavior and dispute claims that they exert control over affiliates.

The judge has not yet ruled on the sanctions request. The case remains active in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.