“We all want freedom, that’s why Bitcoin exists, is to be apolitical freedom money separate from the state; and when you start to then advocate for the state to come and be involved in your freedom money it’s, I hate the phrase slippery slope, but it starts to be a slippery slope.”
— Aaron Daniel
Aaron Daniel is an Appellate attorney and author of The Bitcoin Brief, a newsletter analysing Bitcoin’s effect on law and society. In this interview, we discuss the legal arguments around making Bitcoin US legal tender, and whether it would actually confer any meaningful benefits.
- - - -
It is assumed that for Bitcoin to become widely adopted within the US, it would need to be made legal tender. Without such legal clarity, Bitcoin may continue to be viewed by the general population as an unofficial and risky form of money, liable to be prohibited by the state. Therefore, gaining legal tender status would be a seismic positive shift in Bitcoins development.
Attempts to move the country in this direction are often applauded by Bitcoiners. Whether it is US states commencing processes to establish protections for Bitcoin’s use (including efforts in Arizona to declare Bitcoin as legal tender), to activists and politicians advocating for the Federal government to consider making Bitcoin legal tender. The assumption is these are worthy actions.
But, what is legal tender? What utility and protections does such status provide money? What legal framework(s) would be used to confer legal tender status? And, is it necessarily so that such a classification would benefit Bitcoin and it’s users?
The consideration of any nascent technology in legal terms is always fraught with uncertainty and interpretation. The constitution and bill of rights are a firm basis for the development of the world's oldest and most enduring democracy. But, the consideration of modern developments through the prism of the 18th-century founders results in legal arguments that need testing.
Whist such testing is worthwhile, seeking to make a private digital currency legal tender in the US will be a huge endeavour. And, rushing to develop the legal case misses the more essential policy question: is it beneficial to Bitcoin and its users to mandate its legal standing? Fundamentally, should freedom money remain free: free from state interference, but also free for all people to accept or reject?
- - - -
This episode’s sponsors:
Gemini - Buy Bitcoin instantly
BlockFi - The future of Bitcoin financial services
Bitcasino - The Future of Gaming is here
Pacific Bitcoin - Bitcoin‑only event, Nov 10 & 11, 2022
Ledger - State of the art Bitcoin hardware wallet
Compass Mining - Bitcoin mining & hosting
Cake Wallet - Open-source, privacy-focused Bitcoin wallet
BCB Group - Global digital financial Services
If you enjoy The What Bitcoin Did Podcast you can help support the show by doing the following:
Become a Patron and get access to shows early or help contribute
Make a tip:
QR Codes: Bitcoin
If you do send a tip then please email me so that I can say thank you
Subscribe on iTunes | Spotify | Stitcher | SoundCloud | YouTube | Deezer | TuneIn | RSS Feed
Leave a review on iTunes
Share the show and episodes with your friends and family
Subscribe to the newsletter on my website
Follow me on Twitter Personal | Twitter Podcast | Instagram | Medium | YouTube
If you are interested in sponsoring the show, you can read more about that here or please feel free to drop me an email to discuss options.
This episode is from What Bitcoin Did with Peter McCormack whose proprietor has full ownership and responsibility on its contents and artworks. It was shared using Castamatic, a podcast app for iPhone and iPad.