Oct. 30, 2023
Proposed SEC changes for S7-04-23 MUST uphold the findings, and rulings produced in the following court cases. Any SEC changes or proposals that ignore, or conflict with these landmark rulings would not only injure Americans but would erode the foundational freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of these united states of America! Freedom of Speech & Expression: • Cryptocurrency code is protected speech (Bernstein v. DOJ; Junger v. Daley) • Banning code access violates free speech (Universal City Studios v. Corley) • Disclosure mandates compel speech (Wooley v. Maynard; Riley v. Nat’l Federation of Blind) • Vague standards chill protected speech (Reno v. ACLU) • Anonymity enhances free speech (McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission) Privacy Rights • Warrantless surveillance violates reasonable expectation of privacy (Carpenter v. US; Kyllo v. US) • Identity verification rules contravene informational privacy (Whalen v. Roe) • Compelled disclosure invades privacy (McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission) • Tracking blockchain transactions violates privacy (Carpenter v. US) • Constitutional right to informational privacy (NASA v. Nelson) Freedom of Association • Cryptocurrency communities are expressive associations (Boy Scouts v. Dale; Roberts v. Jaycees) • Identity verification rules violate association (NAACP v. Alabama) • Surveillance deters association (Roberts v. Jaycees) Limits on SEC Power • SEC v. W.J. Howey Co - devised investment contract test • SEC v. C.M. Joiner Leasing Corp - securities laws don’t apply to commodities • Reves v. Ernst & Young - securities laws don’t apply to currency-like notes • SEC v. SG Ltd - no securities where purchasers received website access No Common Enterprise • Gary Plastic Packaging Corp v. Merrill Lynch - no common enterprise with independent control Compelled Speech Violations • Wooley v. Maynard - prohibits compelled speech • Riley v. National Federation of Blind - mandated speech scrutinized Right to Informational Privacy • NASA v. Nelson - constitutional right to information privacy Administrative Law Violations • Retroactive enforcement fails due process (Landgraf v. USI Film Products) • Vague standards violate due process (Sessions v. Dimaya; US v. Davis) • Lack of notice violates due process (Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham; FCC v. Fox Television Stations) • Failed to provide notice and comment (Chamber of Commerce v. SEC) • Arbitrary and capricious actions (Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of U.S., Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co.) Right to Financial Privacy • Monitoring blockchain transactions violates privacy (Carpenter v. US) • Identity verification rules violate financial privacy (Griswold v. Connecticut) Self-Determination Rights • Restricting cryptocurrency contravenes international law on self-determination (UN Charter, Art 1; ICCPR, Art 1) Cryptocurrencies as Commodities/Currencies • CFTC v. McDonnell - virtual currencies are commodities • U.S. v. Faiella - Bitcoin is currency Unconstitutional Vagueness • Vague laws allow arbitrary enforcement (Johnson v. United States) • Laws must provide fair notice (Connally v. General Construction Co.) Regulatory Overreach • Agencies cannot expand power without Congressional authorization (MCI v. AT&T) • Crypto regulation should come from legislature (Cyan v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund) Blockchains Similar to ISPs • Running a blockchain is like being an ISP by providing data access (47 U.S. Code § 230) • ISPs have immunity for third-party content (47 U.S. Code § 230) • Blockchains have user-generated content like ISP sites (47 U.S. Code § 230) • Blockchain users are publishers like ISP users (47 U.S. Code § 230) • Blockchains deserve ISP protections as user-generated content networks (17 U.S. Code § 512) Chris Rowe (Virginia)