> When approving the S-1, the SEC was asked to review a business, not one selling filtration technology, but one selling illegal securities, well within their a

> When approving the S-1, the SEC was asked to review a business, not one selling filtration technology, but one selling illegal securities, well within their area of expertise. > Any crypto sceptic who does not see a problem with this is tainted by their priors. My priors include the idea federal agencies operate within a scoped statutory authority, and the scope of that authority can even vary from function to function. It's a very "swim in your own lane" kind of partitioning. It can lead to counterintuitive interactions, but on the whole makes sense if you step back and look at the system of congressional delegation to agencies they legislatively invent.