The Most Unworkable State Law

The cryptocurrency industry has recently criticised a bill that was recently proposed in the Illinois Senate due to its “unworkable” intentions to compel blockchain miners and validators to perform “impossible things.” One example of this would be undoing transactions if a state court ordered them to do so.

The Senate Bill was surreptitiously submitted into the Illinois senate on February 9 by Illinois Senator Robert Peters. However, it does not seem that the community was aware of it until February 19, when Florida-based attorney Drew Hinkes mentioned it in a tweet.

The bill, which would give the courts the authority to alter or rescind a blockchain transaction that was carried out through the use of a smart contract, would be given the title “Digital Property Protection and Law Enforcement Act,” and it would give the courts this authority in response to a valid request from the attorney general or a state’s attorney that is made in accordance with the laws of Illinois.

Any “blockchain network that executes a blockchain transaction originating in the State” would be subject to the act if it were to become law.

When it comes to blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies, Hinkes referred to the proposed legislation as “the most impractical state law” he has ever seen.

“This is a shocking about-face for a state that was previously supportive of innovation. Instead, he tweeted that the state had enacted “probably the most impractical state legislation relating to cryptocurrency and blockchain I have ever seen.”

According to the provisions of the law, miners and validators on the blockchain might be subject to fines ranging from $5,000 to $10,000 for each day that they disobey the instructions of the court.

Hinkes said that it would be “difficult” for miners and validators to comply with the measure suggested by Senator Peters, despite the fact that he acknowledged the need of passing legislation that would increase consumer protection.

Hinkes was also surprised to learn that miners and validators who worked on a blockchain network that “has not adopted reasonably available processes” to comply with the court orders would have “no defense” open to them.

The law also seems to dictate that “any person utilizing a smart contract to supply goods and services” must include code in the smart contract that may be used to comply with court orders. This code can be used to ensure that the terms of the smart contract are followed.

“Any person utilizing a smart contract to supply goods or services in this State should incorporate smart contract code capable of implementing court orders respecting the smart contract,” is the full text of the law.

Other members of the bitcoin community have replied with derision of the measure in a manner similar to what was previously said.

On February 19, the crypto analyst “foobar” remarked to the 120,800 people who follow him on Twitter that court-ordered transactions would need to be changed “without having the private key” of the participants, which he found to be “hilarious.”