Nicholas Anthony

Following the disclosure that the Biden administration suggested a $600 (now $10,000) barrier for bank account surveillance, many users on social media questioned if such a plan could be considered acceptable under the Fourth Amendment. They are not the first to inquire. In 1976, the issue of financial privacy was litigated all the way to the Supreme Court. The Court reasoned in United States v. Miller that a person cannot willingly submit information to a financial institution and expect that information to be protected by the Fourth Amendment. However, it's possible that it's time to revisit that decision.

Cryptocurrencies came under pressure this autumn when Congress saw the fledgling business as a way to earn tax money. Congress had all it needed to say it had secured $28 billion in projected tax income over the next 10 years in just a few short pages and two modifications to the Internal Revenue Code. Is it true, though, that taxing cryptocurrencies will bring $28 billion to the government's budget?

Is it permissible for the United States Postal Service to offer 'postal banking'?

These are the kinds of problems that led to the 1976 ruling in United States v. Miller, which dealt with the gray regions of privacy. When evaluating the issue, the Court determined that when supplying information to a third party, one cannot properly anticipate privacy.