The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear Harper v. Faulkender, preserving the government’s ability to obtain digital asset transaction data from exchanges like Coinbase without a warrant. At issue was whether the “third-party doctrine”—a longstanding precedent allowing government access to financial records held by intermediaries—should extend to blockchain data. Coinbase, which filed an amicus brief in support of plaintiff James Harper, had hoped the Court might carve out a new privacy standard. The case marked a key test of Fourth Amendment protections in the digital age. “This is a loss for user privacy and for the digital asset industry,” noted a Coinbase-aligned source. The decision hands a quiet victory to the Trump administration, which defended the IRS’s authority to collect exchange data to pursue tax compliance. Future challenges will indoubtedly arise as legal pressure builds to modernize financial privacy standards.
-EDITOR·OP_DAILY SHARE TO X
At the recent Bitcoin Policy Institute Summit in Washington, Galaxy Digital's Head of Research Alex Thorn joined Pierre Rochard to assess the institutional evolution of Bitcoin. Thorne noted an inflection point since the launch of U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs, saying “most of the world’s top 20 hedge funds have exposure,” signaling accelerating mainstream integration. Thorne highlighted that at least 40 public companies are now pursuing Bitcoin treasury strategies, though only a few may replicate MicroStrategy’s scale and financial engineering prowess. “It worked—particularly in fall of 2024, MicroStrategy was probably the biggest story in all capital markets,” Thorne noted. While early-stage enthusiasm continues, Thorne expects eventual saturation, with only one or two dominant players per jurisdiction. Still, with capital markets open and ETF inflows consistent, he sees sustained demand supporting Bitcoin’s price and reducing cyclicality. Notably, retail participants remain underexposed, suggesting further growth as awareness grows.
-EDITOR·OP_DAILY SHARE TO X
As governments worldwide accelerate efforts to digitize currency, a growing divide between digital money and digital cash is drawing attention. While Bitcoin is widely hailed for its fixed supply, its core innovation lies in enabling peer-to-peer transfers without intermediaries—functioning more like digital cash than digital money. Unlike digital money, which is inherently programmable and subject to centralized control, Bitcoin allows for unrestricted, private transactions. “With programmable money, the state could enforce bans on any kind of item it deems unfavorable,” warns writer L0la L33tz. In Germany and the UK, asylum seeker payment cards already restrict withdrawals and purchases; in China, social credit scores limit citizens' mobility and access to services. With 138 jurisdictions exploring central bank digital currencies, privacy advocates argue the stakes are high. As L33tz notes, Bitcoin's resilience lies in preserving access and autonomy in an increasingly surveilled financial system.
-EDITOR·OP_DAILY SHARE TO X
As Bitcoin treasury companies multiply, some analysts are drawing uncomfortable parallels to past financial bubbles. Writing in Bitcoin Magazine, financial historian Joakim Book critiques the surge in corporate strategies designed to turn balance sheets into Bitcoin-buying machines through preferred stock, convertible debt, and mNAV arbitrage. “Financial machines of perpetual motion don’t work,” Book cautions, likening today’s treasury companies to “more eloquent, sophisticated, and better-looking Bankman-Frieds.” While defenders argue this model broadens institutional access to Bitcoin, critics question its sustainability. Jeff Walton admitted on the MSTR True North podcast that dividends may be funded by refinancing debt, prompting Book to call it “the definition of a Ponzi.” With firms like MetaPlanet and NAKA aggressively promoting this playbook, the question remains whether capital markets are funding innovation—or inflating a fragile bubble. Still, if it accelerates Bitcoin adoption, “a kid can dream,” Book concedes.
-EDITOR·OP_DAILY SHARE TO X