That press release does not name any actual laws which were violated. You might do better to link to the ruling itself[0]; it's hardly less biased than the DoJ'

That press release does not name any actual laws which were violated. You might do better to link to the ruling itself[0]; it's hardly less biased than the DoJ's statement, but it is at least more specific about the charges. The government's argument was quite expansive in claiming novel exclusive powers for the federal government, but even so their success hinged on (besides a very sympathetic court and favorable jury instructions) the fact that the Liberty Dollars were not just any private currency but actual metal coins incorporating some phrases and imagery vaguely similar to official US coins. The key elements were the visual similarity for the charge of counterfeiting (they're round like most coins, and likewise silver in color, and contain design inspired by US history—though not any from actual US currency), and the constitutional prohibition on states minting metal coins, despite the fact that the defendant was a private individual and not acting on behalf of any state. There is no particular reason to think the same issues would apply to "minting" a private currency which did not consist of metallic coins or incorporate any "patriotic" imagery. [0] https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-von-nothaus?q=United%20States%20v.%20Von%20Nothaus&sort=date-ascending&p=9&type=case&startDate=946684800000 https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-von-nothaus?q=Unit...