Last month, the treasure lifted Tornado’s cash sanctions. In response, many revived their calls for the Trump administration to leave the charges against Keonne RodrÃguez and William Lonergan Hill, the developers of Samourai Wallet who are currently being prosecuted in the South District of New York.
What many seem to have lost is that the reversal of Treasury sanctions for Tornado Cash also revealed the treasure position on privacy services. And it doesn’t look good.
The elimination of tornado cash of SDN List of Ofac A claim from Tornado Cash in a case of the Texas District Court known as Van Loon V. US Treasury Department, in which it was argued that the sanction of the software was illegal and violated the right to freedom of expression.
The lawsuit was to appeal in the fifth circuit, where three judges ruled that sanctioning software like Tornado Cash was really illegal, since the SDN list of Ofac was reserved for companies, foreign citizens and properties, of which Tornado’s cash is not cash.
The fifth circuit, in turn, ordered the Texas District Court to grant the applicant’s motion for a partial summary judgment, which would constitute a binding court order that the software as the tornado cash cannot be sanctioned by the United States government under the current laws of sanction.
Now the treasure is struggling, in attempts to avoid the trial that would strip the agency of its powers to sanction the immutable privacy software, arguing that a trial is not needed because Tornado’s cash has been eliminated from the OFAC list. But without the trial, the agency could continue sanctioning software that functions as an effective tornado and even punishing the tornado in cash.
The reversal of the sanctions in the tornado cash has little to do with the prosecution of Samourai wallet developers, since neither of them is accused of evasion of sanctions.
But the criminal prosecution of the Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm is extremely important for his case, since he can establish a precedent for the prosecution of RodrÃguez and Hill, who have been accused of conspiracy to operate a transmitter of money without license and conspiracy to commit money laundering.
Both Tornado and Samourai wallet cash are purely without custody software projects, which for a long time have been understood that they are exempt from falling under frames against money laundering that generally apply to banks. If Storm is convicted in July, the government would have a much easier time to successfully process the two Bitcoin developers as well.
While many expected the new administration to end the witch hunt for the old administration in cryptocurrency developers, it seems that Trump’s treasure is equally unfavorable for the development of the Privacy Code.
As coirter indicated At the end of last year, a Pro-Crypto administration is not necessarily equal to an administration of pro-privacity and pro-financial freedom. It seems that we are now witnessing what this means: while the demands against the “cryptographic casinos” such as Coinbase and Uniswap, the privacy software developers such as RodrÃguez and Hill continue to face the threat of decades in jail are being eliminated.
The treasure seems to reason these prosecutions with its hard line position against terrorist financing and cybercrime. Like the agency wrote In the announcement of the reversal of the sanctions of Tornado Cash:
“The Treasury remains committed to the use of our authorities to expose and interrupt the ability of malicious cyber actors to benefit from their criminal activities through the exploitation of digital assets and the digital asset ecosystem.”
In what seems to be the first, the treasure also issued a warning to Users Privacy services, stating that “American people should be cautious before participating in transactions that have such risks.”
In an email that addresses the reversal of the sanctions against the tornado cash, the chain of the Blockchain surveillance firm seems to echo the feeling of the treasure, writing that organizations with exposure [mixer] The addresses must seek legal advisors about their answers and obligations with Ofac. “
The messaging seems clear: although it is not officially illegal to use or deal with mixing services, the treasure seems to try to maintain all open options to present charges against people involved with privacy services in the future.
As I have argued in several articles printed in Bitcoin magazine, this position should not be a surprise, and it is rather an immediate consequence of integrating digital assets into the US regulatory frameworks. The most important is Bitcoin for the government, the more important it will be to stop any behavior considered illegal or criminal.
The Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Besent, has now argued so much in the reversal of the sanctions of Tornado Cash, stating that “ensuring the digital asset industry of the abuse of North Korea and other illicit actors is essential to establish the leadership of the United States and ensure that the US people can benefit from innovation and financial inclusion.”
Although North Korea is supposedly based on cryptocurrency financing for its operations, the general participation of illicit funds within the cryptocurrency space is minimal, placed in a mere 0.14% of all chain transactions by the same analysis.
At the same time, the reasons for people to use privacy services are numerous. As each transaction is visible in the chain, privacy services help people maintain their transaction records and private equity, which in turn protects their physical safety.
As Jameson LopP regularly stands out in her Bitcoin physical attacks Repository, having information about your Bitcoin audience can cause violent invasions at home, kidnappings and, in some cases, murder.
The continuous repression of the Government against privacy services does not seem proportional to eliminating illegal actors of 0.14%, but it seems that the Trump administration is in no hurry to do the right thing to protect Americans and #Freesamourai.
This is an guest publication of L0la L33tz. The opinions expressed are completely yours and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC INC or Bitcoin magazine.
