The Ethereum Foundation and its co-founder Vitalik Buterin have been named as defendants in a federal lawsuit filed by a former employee who alleges she was wrongfully terminated after disclosing a cancer diagnosis and objecting to an internal staff document.
Kayleen Fulton, who previously led the foundation’s Protocol Support team, filed the complaint on November 4, 2026, in the US District Court for the District of Colorado. The suit also names Bastian Aue as a defendant. It accuses the foundation of wrongful termination and discrimination, and invokes the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act.
Allegations in the complaint
According to the filing, Fulton disclosed an ovarian cancer diagnosis on March 24, 2026. She alleges that she and another organizer, Trent Van Epps, were dismissed roughly two weeks later. The research places the termination date at April 6, 2026. Fulton had been earning $195,000 in the role.
The second thread of the case involves a document called the “Ethereum Foundation Mandate.” Drafts reportedly began circulating among staff on February 25, 2026, and the final version was published on March 13. One section, referred to as the “Source Seppuku License,” is described in the research as demanding a vow of suicide from anyone who failed to meet its criteria. That provision reportedly triggered significant dissent among employees.
Fulton and 53 other staff members pushed back with a letter stating that the signatories had not resigned. Fulton alleges that this resistance, combined with her medical disclosure, led directly to her firing.
The alleged sequence is compact: a contested document finalized in mid-March, a cancer diagnosis disclosed on March 24, and a termination on April 6.
Why the defendants list matters
Suing an organization over employment practices is routine. Naming Vitalik Buterin personally is not. Bastian Aue is also named as a defendant. The complaint ties the alleged violations to the foundation’s leadership, not just its HR process.
Background: a foundation built on mission
The Ethereum Foundation occupies an unusual position. It is a nonprofit that supports the development of a network it does not formally control. Teams like Protocol Support sit close to the core work of keeping that network running and coordinated. Losing the person who led that function is not a trivial staffing change.
What this means for Ethereum and its stakeholders
For the foundation, the immediate risk is reputational. The allegations involve a cancer diagnosis, a contested loyalty-style document, and a provision described as invoking suicide.
For the broader Ethereum community, the case raises governance questions that go beyond one employee. Who drafted the Mandate? How was it enforced? What happened to the other signatories of the dissent letter?
What to watch next: the foundation’s formal response to the complaint, any motion to dismiss individual defendants such as Buterin, and whether other signatories of the dissent letter come forward with their own accounts. The text of the Mandate itself, if it becomes part of the public record, will likely shape how the community judges the foundation’s conduct.
