> No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
-Article I, Section 10, Clause 1
Anything in the constitution is not canonical forever.
It is, however, canonical until amended or SCOTUS interprets it away.
Constitutionally, it appears quite clear Arizona can't do this currently, and the law as a result would almost certainly be immediately stayed and struck down if passed.
Well, they've already violated this by accepting USD, but that doesn't necessarily mean they can just do BTC too. To strike this down the courts would need a lawsuit, though, and I'm not sure who could claim damages.
> coin money
I take this to mean issuing a currency, which they are not doing here since they don't control BTC.
Standing would presumably be with the party which refused bitcoin payment in satisfaction of a debt.
... no, the US dollar is a Federal construction, created by Congress. Congress is not bound by Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 - only the states.
I don't think "make legal tender" means "create" but rather "accept as".
Consider cash:
> There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise.
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages...
It is, of course, a bit different since cash, check, and credit are all denominated in dollars, whereas Bitcoin is denominated in Bitcoin.
From Investopedia: "Creditors are required to accept them as payment offered to discharge a debt; however, except where prohibited by state law, private businesses may refuse to accept some or all forms of cash tender provided that a transaction has not already occurred and debt has not been incurred by the customer."
https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm
> There is no federal statute mandating that a private business, a person, or an organization must accept currency or coins as payment for goods or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether to accept cash unless there is a state law that says otherwise.
Only debts. Receiving a good/service might generate a debt, but not always; for example, if you pay in advance for a service.
Seriously, if it reaches that point, sure maybe Bitcoin is not going to work and we will pick something “new,” but for payment processing it doesn’t matter as intermediaries will pop up as they did for cash.
Edit: Disclaimer: I worked and work on that “new” stuff.
I heard Cashapp's lightning implementation works well.
Edit: maybe someone knowledgeable can chime in; I don't think states can even do this. The US Government determines what is legal tender in the US.
> Oath Keepers is an American far-right[1] anti-government militia[1][2] whose members claim to be defending the Constitution of the United States.[3] It encourages its members to disobey orders which they believe would violate the U.S. Constitution. Research on their membership determined that two thirds of the Oath Keepers are former military or law enforcement, and one tenth are active duty military or law enforcement. Most research determined the Oath Keeper membership to be approximately 5,000 members, while leaked data showed Oath Keeper rosters claiming membership of 38,000
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_Keepers
> Promise Keepers is an Evangelical Christian parachurch organization for men. It originated in the United States, but independent branches have also been established in Canada and New Zealand.
> Promise Keepers describes its goal as "to bring about revival through a global movement that calls men back to courageous, bold, leadership. We will be the spark that calls men back to God’s Word, sharing their faith and caring for the poor and oppressed throughout the world."[2] Promise Keepers is a non-profit organization, not affiliated with any Christian church or denomination. It opposes same-sex marriage, and champions chastity and marital fidelity and the man as being head of the household. Its most widely-publicized events tend to be mass rallies held at football stadiums and similar venues.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promise_Keepers
(funny enough wikipedia has a warning, "not to be confused with Oath Keepers", might be time for a rebranding)
https://www.billtrack50.com/legislatordetail/25708
And no, that is not legal.
> A Central American University survey conducted last September found that nine out of 10 citizens in the country didn’t know what bitcoin was, and eight out of 10 said they had little to no confidence in the digital cash.
It's just synecdoche.
I suppose it's just like the Assange and Snowden situation. The USA releases all kinds of reports about press freedoms around the world and "authoritarianism", but somehow the USA never includes itself in these reports.
Under capitalisms fourth epoch, neoliberalism, there simply isnt much left for the state to really do. Its completely divorced by monetary policy save for ardent enforcement of austerity or the class structure through physical means, and its only ever called upon each decade to bless the rescue of lumbering appendages such as trade and banking when they fail. The state runs the military but has no real say in foreign trade, save when its called upon to enact the will of its true constituency (the capital class) in affecting the firm will of globalization in its varied permutations. the state runs education only in that it may abdicate itself from the role through privatization, and the state has a say in healthcare only in that its made compulsory its purchase through law. its regulatory agency has largely been diluted to a brisk rubber stamp in all but the most arcane function.
So left to their own devices, states must remain relevant in that they exude autonomy and purpose, lest their citizens grow restless and apathetic to the call of democracy twice or thrice a year. a law here, an edict there, some popcorn and theatricality always help...even if its ultimately at the expense of the tax payer through lawsuits and defeat, it at least keeps them interested and entertained. it acts as a bundle of shiny car keys to a child, lest apathy at the polls completely delegitimize the state as an organism.
