- This is the thesis contained in the materials of the trial on the legality of the blocking of the mixer
- The agency also shifted the responsibility for misconduct on the site
In early May there was a trial on the legality of the blocking of the service Tornado Cash.
The Treasury Department defended its right to sanction the mixer, but the arguments officials used in the process are truly frightening.
The class action lawsuit claims that OFAC (a division of the U.S. Treasury Department) exceeded its authority.
Allegedly Tornado Cash is not a proprietary entity or a person or entity. For a full list of the parties’ arguments and the outcome of the proceedings, click here.
The other interesting thing about this process is how the Ministry of Finance sees this whole situation.
The agency’s position was brought to the attention of crypto-entrepreneur Chris Black.
He shared a quote from the case file in which officials compare TORN token holders to Al Qaeda (a banned group) terrorists.
But that’s not all. Ministry of Finance believes that TORN holders should be held liable for the actions of a sub-sanctioned person. And this is how the department views the privacy issue:
“Those who want to use Tornado Cash can choose other legitimate means of private cash transfer, including traditional channels, such as banking.”
The Treasury Department also believes that TORN holders “own” immutable smart contracts, and this allows them to derive some benefit. This thesis is absurd at all.
But these arguments were enough for the court. Tornado Cash will remain under sanctions, TORN holders in the U.S. are “terrorists,” and the token itself is apparently a derivative.
This is the conclusion that follows from the results of the trial.
We told you earlier about Tornado Cash 2.0. What is interesting is that the developer claims it is “a slightly more regulated counterpart”.