Six people trying to overthrow the foreign Ministry of Finance's decision to impose sanctions on the login password switch valve Tornado Cash have just given four key arguments in support of their resolution.

In a declaration submitted on May 24 to apply a partial summary ruling, the group fabricated lies in a case that "has nothing to do with setting unique standards for new technology". On the contrary, it is a case of abuse of power and infringement of first Amendment control by government departments.

Wade Greval, Coinbase's chief legal officer, soon summed up this argument on Twitter, feeling that the government was seeking to apply a property sanctions policy and regulation to ban open source projects-putting the cart before the horse.

The Coinbase applies to the prosecution of the foreign Ministry of Finance, which was first mentioned on September 1st. August 8th, 2022. The six appellants applicable to this application are Franz Van long, Taiqin Almeida, Alexander Fisher, Preston Fan long, Aaron Vitale and Nate Welch. The document details that most of the company's people have previously interacted with Tornado Cash.

Four key arguments

The first argument has to do with the Treasury's attempt to classify Tornado Cash as the "people" of other countries-something it must do to justify its actions-called the Institute of unincorporated organizations.

However, the plaintiff stressed that the Ministry of Finance has defined sandstorm cash as including the holder of various torn tokens, regardless of whether he worked together with the same purpose or not. The appellant fabricated lies, and according to this definition, according to the Ministry of Finance's own tests, Tornado Cash cannot be classified as an unregistered research society.

The second argument is why a functional open source system block chain smart contract for Tornado Cash cannot be called property, because property only refers to what is available.

Even if such a smart contract can be called property, the plaintiff's third argument is that there is no Tornado Cash entity line that contains all "interests" in various contracts, so the Treasury has no right to impose sanctions on it.

The final argument is that even if the Treasury does have the right to do so, sanctions against Tornado Cash violate the first Amendment and cannot be defended by claiming that Tornado Cash customers should have the right to freedom of expression elsewhere.

Related to:The proposal suggests that sandstorm cash raiders may hand over control.

The Ministry of Finance initially approved some detailed addresses related to Tornado Cash on Aug. 8, 2022, a month after the user interface code was opened to the public.

Web3 gamers: Illuvium dissent, Aurory foreword comments, Fornite CEO Salty, Assassin dogma NFTs