Blockchain Law and Civil Asset Forfeiture
“Blockchain law” refers to the emerging legal field addressing the legal, regulatory, and policy issues arising from the use of blockchain technology, digital assets (like cryptocurrencies and stablecoins), and smart contracts.
Blockchain law has become an increasingly important area of practice as government agencies expand their use of seizure and forfeiture powers against digital assets. While many people associate blockchain law with regulation or compliance, a large portion of real-world blockchain litigation involves civil asset forfeiture, wallet freezes, and exchange account seizures.
In these cases, the government does not need to prove that a person committed a crime before taking control of cryptocurrency. Instead, agencies often proceed under civil forfeiture statutes that treat the digital asset itself as the defendant. That distinction is critical—and frequently misunderstood.
When people hear the term “blockchain law,” they often think of token offerings, smart contracts, or regulatory filings. In practice, blockchain law also governs what happens when law enforcement:
- causes a cryptocurrency wallet to be frozen;
- uses a seizure warrant to seize digital assets from an exchange account;
- relies on blockchain tracing to allege illicit activity; or
- initiates a civil forfeiture proceeding involving crypto.
These cases involving the blockchain pose real risk of permanent loss if the owner does not respond correctly.
Choosing an Attorney for Blockchain Law and Forfeiture Issues
If your cryptocurrency has been seized, frozen, or restricted, the most important question is not whether you were accused of a crime. The question is whether the attorney you hire understands blockchain law well enough to protect your rights before procedural deadlines eliminate them.
For many clients, these cases represent their first exposure to forfeiture law and blockchain enforcement. A misstep early in the process can mean losing digital assets permanently, without ever having a meaningful opportunity to be heard.
Blockchain law is not abstract. It directly affects whether seized or frozen cryptocurrency is returned—or forfeited forever.
Jason Sammis and Leslie Sammis focus on the intersection between blockchain law and civil asset forfeiture. Both have been successful in complex motion hearings, jury trials, appeals in civil asset forfeiture cases. Both have experience working with the top experts in blockchain forensics.
Call 813-250-0500.
How the Blockchain Determines Whether Crypto Can Be Seized
Under federal and state forfeiture laws, cryptocurrency can be seized based on allegations that it is connected to unlawful activity, even if the owner is never charged with a crime. Once seized or frozen, the burden often shifts to the owner to prove lawful ownership and lack of knowledge.
This is where blockchain law intersects with forfeiture law. Attorneys handling these cases must understand not only the statutes, but also:
- how blockchain transactions are traced;
- how exchanges respond to law enforcement requests;
- how stablecoins can be frozen, blacklisted or seized; and
- how investigative assumptions can be challenged.
Without that knowledge, it is easy to miss defenses that are unique to blockchain-based assets.
Innocent Owners Are Common in Blockchain Forfeiture Cases
Many blockchain forfeiture cases involve innocent owners, including:
- traders whose wallets were flagged because of proximity to another address;
- business owners paid in cryptocurrency later labeled “tainted;”
- investors who unknowingly received funds tied to third-party misconduct, and
- individuals whose exchange accounts were frozen during a broader investigation.
Blockchain tracing tools are powerful, but they are not perfect. Overbroad clustering and assumptions about intent can sweep in people who had no involvement in illegal activity. Blockchain law provides the framework for challenging those assumptions.
Why Experience Matters in Blockchain Law Cases
Blockchain forfeiture cases move quickly and often begin outside of court. Funds may be frozen weeks or months before a formal forfeiture complaint is filed. During that time, deadlines can run and rights can be lost. An attorney handling blockchain law matters must know:
- when a seizure becomes final
- how and when to file a verified claim
- how to assert an innocent-owner defense
- how to challenge the sufficiency of blockchain tracing
- how to force judicial review when agencies prefer administrative procedures.
This is not general criminal defense work. It is a niche practice that blends forfeiture law, constitutional principles, and a working understanding of blockchain systems.
Cryptocurrency Has Changed How Forfeiture Is Enforced
Digital assets have fundamentally changed forfeiture enforcement. Unlike cash or vehicles, cryptocurrency can be:
- frozen remotely
- traced across borders
- seized without physical possession
- restricted through third-party compliance actions.
As a result, blockchain law increasingly governs how property rights are asserted and defended in forfeiture cases. Attorneys must be able to explain both the legal and technical aspects of ownership to courts that are still developing their understanding of blockchain technology.
This article was last updated on Friday, December 19, 2025.
