{"id":24852,"date":"2023-03-28T15:10:26","date_gmt":"2023-03-28T22:10:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/coinnetworknews.com\/law-firms-white-paper-claims-us-bank-regulators-are-waging-a-clandestine-financial-war-against-crypto-businesses-bitcoin-news\/"},"modified":"2023-03-28T15:10:26","modified_gmt":"2023-03-28T22:10:26","slug":"law-firms-white-paper-claims-us-bank-regulators-are-waging-a-clandestine-financial-war-against-crypto-businesses-bitcoin-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/coinnetworknews.com\/law-firms-white-paper-claims-us-bank-regulators-are-waging-a-clandestine-financial-war-against-crypto-businesses-bitcoin-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Law Firm’s White Paper Claims US Bank Regulators Are Waging a ‘Clandestine Financial War’ Against Crypto Businesses \u2013 Bitcoin News"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n<\/header>\n
\n\"\"\n<\/div>\n

According to a recent white paper published by four members of the law firm Cooper & Kirk, PLLC, U.S. bank regulators are attempting to \u201cdrive crypto businesses out of the financial system.\u201d The paper, titled \u201cOperation Chokepoint 2.0,\u201d claims that after laying the groundwork by labeling lawful businesses as \u201creputationally risky,\u201d federal bank regulators, with the help of state officials, \u201cturned to the task of purging their accounts from each of the banks subject to their supervision.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

Constitutional Issues Raised by Operation Chokepoint 2.0: Depriving Businesses of Due Process and Key Structural Constitutional Protections<\/h2>\n

Five days ago, Bitcoin.com News published an article<\/a> that examines recent discussions in the crypto community regarding \u201cOperation Chokepoint\u201d and why crypto proponents believe the U.S. government aims to eliminate access to cryptocurrencies. On Monday, the Washington D.C. law firm Cooper & Kirk published a white paper<\/a> on the subject, noting that U.S. bank regulators are ostensibly waging a \u201cclandestine financial war\u201d against the crypto industry.<\/p>\n

The paper\u2019s authors, David Thompson, John Ohlendorf, Harold Reeves, and Joseph Masterman, begin by explaining \u201cOperation Chokepoint 1.0\u201d before delving into \u201cOperation Chokepoint 2.0.\u201d The first iteration of the alleged operation began by labeling legal and law-abiding crypto entities as \u201creputationally risky.\u201d<\/p>\n

The second stage of the operation attempts to choke the crypto industry by restricting access to on and off-ramps. According to the Cooper & Kirk paper, \u201cin the back rooms of banks around the country, bank examiners explained that those financial institutions that continued to serve customers that the federal regulators had labeled \u2018reputationally risky\u2019 would suffer the consequences.\u201d<\/p>\n

The law firm explains that one of the first acts committed was when the Biden administration\u2019s Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) rescinded a rule designed to \u201censure fair access to banking services for several industries\u2014including debt collection\u2014previously cut off during the controversial Obama-era program Operation Chokepoint.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Cooper & Kirk authors further detail that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) got involved on April 7, 2022. At that time, the FDIC issued a letter to all institutions under its supervision, asking for information concerning their interest in serving the crypto industry and banks that are already engaged with businesses of this nature. Cooper & Kirk\u2019s white paper asserts that Operation Chokepoint 2.0 is unlawful and unconstitutional.<\/p>\n

\u201cOperation Choke Point 2.0 deprives businesses of their constitutional rights to due process in violation of the Fifth Amendment,\u201d the paper\u2019s authors explain. \u201cOperation Choke Point 2.0 violates both the non-delegation doctrine and the anti-commandeering doctrine, depriving Americans of key structural constitutional protections against the arbitrary exercise of governmental power.\u201d<\/p>\n

The white paper follows the failures of three major U.S. banks that had connections with the crypto industry, as well as commentary from Signature Bank<\/a> board member and former politician Barney Frank, who suggested<\/a> that Signature\u2019s seizure was meant to be an \u201canti-crypto\u201d message.<\/p>\n

\n
\nTags in this story
\n<\/h6>\n
Access to crypto<\/a>, accounts<\/a>, anti-commandeering doctrine<\/a>, bank examiners<\/a>, Banking<\/a>, Barney Frank<\/a>, Biden Administration<\/a>, Bitcoin<\/a>, Compliance<\/a>, constitutional protections<\/a>, Cooper & Kirk<\/a>, crypto industry<\/a>, Crypto Proponents<\/a>, Cryptocurrency<\/a>, Customers<\/a>, Due Process<\/a>, Enforcement<\/a>, entities<\/a>, FDIC<\/a>, federal regulators<\/a>, Finance<\/a>, financial system<\/a>, financial war<\/a>, Government<\/a>, industry<\/a>, institutions<\/a>, Law<\/a>, law-abiding<\/a>, lawful<\/a>, legal<\/a>, non-delegation doctrine<\/a>, OCC<\/a>, off-ramps<\/a>, on-ramps<\/a>, operation chokepoint<\/a>, purging<\/a>, Regulation<\/a>, Reputation<\/a>, risk<\/a>, Signature Bank<\/a>, state officials<\/a>, supervision<\/a>, US banks<\/a>, White Paper<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

What do you think about the allegations made in the Cooper & Kirk white paper? Do you believe that Operation Chokepoint 2.0 is unconstitutional, and if so, what actions should be taken to protect the rights of crypto businesses? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

\n
\n\n<\/div>\n
\n
\nJamie Redman <\/h6>\n

\nJamie Redman is the News Lead at Bitcoin.com News and a financial tech journalist living in Florida. Redman has been an active member of the cryptocurrency community since 2011. He has a passion for Bitcoin, open-source code, and decentralized applications. Since September 2015, Redman has written more than 6,000 articles for Bitcoin.com News about the disruptive protocols emerging today.

\n
\n
\n<\/a>
\n<\/span>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Image Credits<\/b>: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

Disclaimer<\/strong>: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Bitcoin.com<\/a> does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n