So basically, FinCEN telling SDNY that Samourai Wallet *did not* need a MSB license was just their "individual, informal opinion," bro.

(full story at end of post)

According to SDNY, such "individual, informal opinions" are not Brady material, and therefore SDNY has not withheld anything, mooting the defense's request for a hearing.

To the contrary, SDNY argues, that the prosecutors even handed such "individual, informal opinions" over – despite not believing that they are Brady material – "demonstrate its complete commitment to meeting its disclosure obligations."

The problem is that they may have a point citing SCOTUS overturning of the Chevron doctrine, meaning that courts are no longer required to defer to an agency's interpretation of the law.

On the other hand, when not even regulators are able to interpret the law correctly according to SDNY, it should be questionable how anyone else would be supposed to.