Re: Cato forum tomorrow: should money laundering be a crime?

[Steve Schear <schear@lvdi.net>]

>(Why is this discussion limited to just the four of us? Surely Declan and
>his Cato buddies are worthy to hear our arguments? I dislike the "taking
>things private" mindset, when the lists are already so cluttered with Toto
>rants and other consumers of vast amounts of bandwidth.)

If my header lines implied this, it was inadvertent.  I agree more 'relevent' content on CP is desireable.

>I haven't quite said that all forms of communication/spending money will be
>speech and therefore protected. (Besides, we all know of many forms of
>speech that are unprotected.)
>
>What I (and Michael Froomkin, in his own CFP talk) have argued is that
>digital money will be _undetectable_ in many cases unless government
>demands that the contents of a private communication be revealed. A kind of
>prior restraint on speech.
>
[snip]

>If the government determines, somehow, that Alice was
>involved in an illegal transaction, tax evasion, money laundering, etc.,
>they can try to get her on that. But they can't insist that words be
>submitted to a government agent for approval."

Isn't uttering a check protected speech?  What about if a check is stego-coded in some political rant?  Can the Feds insist I not utter that speech?

--Steve


PGP mail preferred, see  	http://www.pgp.com and
				http://web.mit.edu/network/pgp.html

RSA fingerprint: FE90 1A95 9DEA 8D61  812E CCA9 A44A FBA9
RSA key: http://keys.pgp.com:11371/pks/lookup?op=index&search=0x55C78B0D
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear              | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO                       | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Corporation  |
7075 West Gowan Road      |
Suite 2148                |
Las Vegas, NV 89129       | Internet: schear@lvdi.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------

	I know not what course others may take; but as for me, 
	give me ECache or give me debt!

	"It's your Cache�"