FinCEN’s Crypto Proposals Challenge US Constitutional Principles
Crypto enthusiast Preston Pysh has scrutinized the recent proposals by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) aimed at tracking all cryptocurrency transactions. He contends that these rules are in conflict with several US laws and the Constitution, and they do not align with the traditional scope of bank transfers.
On this page
Crypto enthusiast Preston Pysh has scrutinized the recent proposals by
the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) aimed at tracking all
cryptocurrency transactions. He contends that these rules are in
conflict with several US laws and the Constitution, and they do not
align with the traditional scope of bank transfers.
Pysh
references the Supreme Court case “Carpenter v. United States,” where
smartphone tracking was deemed a search, necessitating a proper warrant.
He also notes that under the law, citizens are not obliged to report
standard purchases.
As
of now, ongoing consultations between civic leaders and FinCEN will
extend until the end of January 2024. This period is intended for
officials to collect the required information. However, the crypto
community is already mounting significant resistance against these
preliminary regulatory measures.
The content on The Coinomist is for informational purposes only and should not be interpreted as financial advice. While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any content. Neither we accept liability for any errors or omissions in the information provided or for any financial losses incurred as a result of relying on this information. Actions based on this content are at your own risk. Always do your own research and consult a professional. See our Terms, Privacy Policy, and Disclaimers for more details.
Articles by this author
