This is not a technological solution. It's an attempt to create a legal convention of applying a particular form of centralized blacklisting. The power of this

This is not a technological solution. It's an attempt to create a legal convention of applying a particular form of centralized blacklisting. The power of this method is directly proportional to how widely it's adopted. And the reference to a precedent gives a false sense of legal legitimacy to this form of blacklisting. The decision referenced dealt with creditor claims to a shared asset. The relevant legal precedent is from 1749. That's when a court sided with the Royal Bank of Scotland in its legal challenge to a request for a blacklist for notes used in crime. The RBS argument was that making money responsible for the acts of its previous holders would "render the Notes absolutely useless": https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2260952 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2260952 For hundreds of years, that has been the legal treatment of cash, which has facilitated commerce, by making cash fungible. Jurisdictions around the world have been steadily degrading the principle of fungibility over the last 40 years to institute a mass surveillance system to stop the drug trade, money laundering and income tax evasion (it's worth noting the income tax didn't exist in 1749). The result is concentrated power structures accumulating ever greater bureaucratic control over the traditional financial system.