Authors Peter Van Valkenburgh
7 days
30 days
All time
Recent
Popular
1/ Here's a thread on the constitutional challenges to the midnight rulemaking that @coincenter is holding in reserve. They boil down to your rights against warrantless search and seizure (4th amendment) and your rights to assemble anonymously (1st amendment).
2/ 4th Amendment. In theory any government search and seizure of personal information should occur only after government obtains a warrant from a judge. To get a warrant they'll need to specifically describe the thing to be searched and explain why they've suspicion of crime.
3/ The Bank Secrecy Act is a bulk financial record surveillance law that forces banks and other financial institutions (crypto exchanges included) to collect personal information from customers and report it to government without any warrant or individual suspicion.
4/ The BSA's constitutionality as a warrantless search was challenged in the 1970s and the court narrowly upheld the law (and this is important) as it was applied by Treasury at the time. Since then its application has been significantly expanded and that's been unchallenged.
5/ the cases were Shultz https://t.co/BtAfdXMSBh and Miller https://t.co/nngic7231N. The Court said that warrants are not required if government searches information bank customers have already handed over to a third party (bank). This became known as the third party doctrine.
2/ 4th Amendment. In theory any government search and seizure of personal information should occur only after government obtains a warrant from a judge. To get a warrant they'll need to specifically describe the thing to be searched and explain why they've suspicion of crime.
3/ The Bank Secrecy Act is a bulk financial record surveillance law that forces banks and other financial institutions (crypto exchanges included) to collect personal information from customers and report it to government without any warrant or individual suspicion.
4/ The BSA's constitutionality as a warrantless search was challenged in the 1970s and the court narrowly upheld the law (and this is important) as it was applied by Treasury at the time. Since then its application has been significantly expanded and that's been unchallenged.
5/ the cases were Shultz https://t.co/BtAfdXMSBh and Miller https://t.co/nngic7231N. The Court said that warrants are not required if government searches information bank customers have already handed over to a third party (bank). This became known as the third party doctrine.