SBF’s case was completely different, since the legality of his actions was much more easily provable as a crime. Not only was every transaction on the actual blockchain, which is immutable and couldn’t have possibly been faked, but his actions didn’t exactly have any nuance that could be argued in court. There were funds, they weren’t his, but he used them. Case closed.
Trump’s case involves not only a lot more possible statutes he could have violated, but also a lot of arbitrary actions that don’t perfectly fall into a rigid box of “this is legal” or “this is illegal.”
Plus, if you have more money to draw out legal fights, you can keep them going for longer, regardless of your case. SBF had most of his assets confiscated since they were almost entirely from the fraud, so he didn’t have the same luxuries.
That ruling does not affect the ability of the president to put someone else in jail, unilaterally, of their own decision.