As of Thursday, in their Rule 29 response, the DOJ is still pushing this theory that Storm, by publishing TC software, provided a "valuable service" to a sanctioned entity because DPRK used the protocol. This flawed principle is limitless: if I make a hammer with no particular end user in mind and somehow that hammer ends up being used by DPRK, I provided them a "valuable service." But you don't see them going after Apple for the iPhone, Google for its tech suite, etc., even though these tech tools are used by the DPRK. That's because this is a gross distortion of the law. Back when we @fund_defi @jchervinsky wrote our amicus brief in support of @rstormsf's MTD, we reviewed over 100 sanctions cases and provided the court with a table of them - in every single case there was nexus between the sanctioned entity and the defendant, some evidence the defendant directly connected with the SDN or created a tool *for* the SDN specifically. There was no case - none - where a defendant made a tool with no particular end user in mind and was then convicted of violating sanctions because an SDN ended up with that tool in hand.

A court of law is a serious place. It isn't a movie set for prosecutors' smears & half-truths. It isn't a college debate stage for clever missives. It's where we decide who loses liberty and who doesn't. The government should act like it.

I am very concerned that the courts, these AUSA's prosecuting crypto crime, and the IRS do not seem to understand the difference between using LIFO to: (1) establish the amount of assets that flowed through a very limited set of KNOWN parties and a very limited set of their KNOWN accounts. (2) trace $148k through TEN unattributed wallets on the blockchain, each of which do somewhere between $4m in volume and $1.5 billion in volume, to establish that the last wallet in the chain received the victims funds and then sent out the victim's funds to Tornado Cash. I've never seen anything like this. I've never worked with a single fed who would back a freeze like this. I wouldn't back a freeze like this. Doing so runs a real risk in freezing an innocent third-party's funds unlawfully. It almost certainly does not impact the actual criminal—the thief, or their money laundering counterparts. Thus, it would not create recourse for the victims of the original crime.

Congratulations @_jikim - an admirable leader for CCI and a true champion for the industry.

DeFi regulation is a sticking point in the market structure bill debate. CLARITY passed the House with good but not great protections for DeFi developers. We need to fight for more in the Senate. This is no time to compromise just to “get a bill done.” Protect DeFi or no deal.

DeFi *IS* different. Thank you @CongressmanGT for championing DeFi on the House floor: "Congress is making an unambiguous statement that DeFi is different and it should be treated differently from the centralized, custodial intermediaries. Protecting this emerging technology is an essential purpose of the CLARITY Act." We could not agree more.

A few moments ago on the House Floor, @RepFrenchHill acknowledged that "decentralized finance or DeFi developers do not take custody of user assets, nor do they control user assets. Therefore, we should not treat them in the same way we treat centralized actors who do have custody, who do have control over assets." Thank you Chair Hill for recognizing DeFi's unique characteristics.

Day 1 of the Roman Storm trial is in the books, and perhaps we need to make something clear to the government: Normal 👏people 👏also 👏deserve 👏 financial👏 privacy👏 Privacy is NOT a crime.

The CLARITY Act represents meaningful progress towards greater regulatory clarity for the digital asset industry and critical protections for DeFi developers, users, and technology in the US. In a new DEF Blog, we outline what CLARITY means for DeFi.

1/ DEF is excited to see the House vote on three important pro-crypto bills this week. Each bill is a meaningful step forward for digital assets in the U.S. and will help ensure the U.S. stays competitive in a rapidly evolving digital economy.