Update: April 8 at 1:01am UTC: This article has been updated to include James Murphy’s responses to two questions from Cointelegraph.
A crypto lawyer has sued the US Department of Homeland Security, alleging the agency may know who created Bitcoin — compelling the department to share what it knows.
The Freedom of Information Act lawsuit was filed by James Murphy, who based his accusations on claims made by DHS Special Agent Rana Saoud at a conference in April 2019, where she said a few of her colleagues had previously met with four people involved in creating Bitcoin.
“My FOIA lawsuit simply asks for the notes, email and other documents relating to that alleged interview,” Murphy posted to X after announcing the April 7 suit.
“IF the interview really happened as the DHS Agent claimed, there should be documentation of the substance of that meeting,” added Murphy, who goes by MetaLawMan on X.
Speaking at the OffshoreAlert Conference North America in Miami in April 2019, Saoud said DHS agents met with the four people it believed to have created Bitcoin, asking what their motives were and what the “end game” is for Bitcoin.
“The agents flew to California and they realized that he wasn’t alone in creating this, there were three other people, they sat down and talked with them to find out how this actually works and what the reason for it was,” Saoud said in the presentation, which is available on YouTube.
If the DHS resists disclosure, Murphy said he will “pursue the case to conclusion” to solve the mystery.
Murphy, however, noted that it is possible that Saoud and the other DHS agents were mistaken and did not interview the real Satoshi Nakamoto.
Murphy is being assisted by former Assistant US Attorney Brian Field, who specializes in Freedom of Information Act litigation.
The purpose of the Freedom of Information Act is to promote transparency and accountability by granting the public access to information held by the government.
2 questions for James Murphy, aka MetaLawMan
Cointelegraph asked Murphy two questions about the DHS lawsuit. Here are his responses in full.
Question #1: What is your gut feeling—do you think the DHS actually interviewed the real Satoshi?
Answer: “I think it’s very possible that the DHS agent was mistaken in what she said at that conference. I think DHS agents may have met with bitcoin code maintainers, or with actual Satoshi imposters. But, who knows? The DHS agent was a pretty high ranking official and was in a position to know what she was talking about. Either way, I think it will be productive to find out and hopefully resolve this question. Nothing prevents DHS from voluntarily revealing the information without need for protracted litigation.”
Question #2: If the agency did speak with the four creators — who may be ordinary US citizens — why do you believe revealing their identities serves the public interest, even if it could put their safety or privacy at risk?
Answer: “I don’t understand the question. The identities of the creators of all of the largest blockchain projects, like Charles Hoskinson and Vitalik Buterin etc., are all well known in the crypto community. There are also many major figures like Michael Saylor, Tim Draper and others who have amassed enormous wealth through investment in bitcoin and their identities are well known.
There are hundreds of documentaries on YouTube where amateur sleuths have tried to identify Satoshi. I’m not one of them. I’m not hiring investigators to try to track down Satoshi, I’m seeking government records under transparency laws in effect in the U.S. If DHS did, in fact, learn Satoshi’s identity, then I’m not sure what the rationale is for dozens of government employees to have this information but withhold it from the general public.
Our government is required to be transparent and not keep secrets from the citizens, absent a legitimate national security concern or other limited exemption. We consider this a fundamental aspect of our freedom in the USA. It is why we have something called the “Freedom of Information Act.” Transparency is good, the government hiding information from the citizenry is generally bad.
I am open about the fact that I am pro-bitcoin, having been an investor in bitcoin and a bitcoin miner since 2017. I speak to groups of executives and policy makers about bitcoin and I advocate for bitcoin adoption. What I find when I give these talks is very often these audiences (who are new to bitcoin) struggle with the idea that the creator of bitcoin is unknown while the provenance of the other major crypto projects is (relatively) transparent.
So, my intention is to either conclusively refute the claim of the DHS agent that they interviewed Satoshi, or achieve some transparency that will open the door to greater bitcoin adoption in the U.S. and around the globe. I support President Trump’s initiatives to establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and Digital Asset Stockpile.
Since the bitcoin code is open source and can only be changed through the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) procedure, Satoshi (if he or they were identified) would have no ability to unilaterally affect changes to bitcoin. As a result, any revelation of Satoshi’s identity is unlikely to adversely impact bitcoin. It’s more likely that such transparency would be a net positive for growing bitcoin adoption. Others may have different views on that and I respect their opinions.”
Efforts to identify Satoshi Nakamoto have failed
The lawsuit follows a wave of recent efforts attempting to uncover Satoshi’s identity.
Last October, a controversial HBO documentary claimed that Peter Todd, a Bitcoin cypherpunk, invented Bitcoin. Todd refuted that conclusion, and most industry pundits said HBO’s evidence was weak.
Nick Szabo, Adam Back and Hal Finney have also had their names tied to Satoshi’s identity. Szabo and Back regularly refute claims they’re Satoshi, as did Finney before he died in 2013.
Meanwhile, members of the Bitcoin community are split on whether unveiling Satoshi’s identity would be a net positive for Bitcoin.
Some worry that revealing Satoshi’s identity could compromise Bitcoin’s decentralized ethos and put Satoshi’s safety at risk, while others want to be reassured that Bitcoin wasn’t created by the US government.
Despite the ongoing market meltdown on US trade tariffs, executives at major cryptocurrency firms Messari and Sygnum are bullish on institutional Bitcoin adoption later in 2025.
Speaking on a panel at Paris Blockchain Week on April 8, Messari CEO Eric Turner and Sygnum Bank co-founder Thomas Eichenberger said they expect a significant shift in the banking sector’s involvement with crypto in the second half of the year.
According to the executives, the global banking push into Bitcoin (BTC) services has great potential to happen in the second half of 2025 as regulators embrace crypto, including stablecoins and crypto services by banks.
“I think we’re probably looking at a muted Q2, but I’m really excited for Q3 and Q4,” Messari’s Turner said during the panel discussion moderated by Cointelegraph CEO Yana Prikhodchenko, forecasting “really interesting” things coming to the crypto market in 2025.
“When you look at the potential of having market structure regulation in the US, stablecoin regulation, and just the fact that across the board, not just President Trump himself, but the SEC and all these regulatory industries are really embracing crypto,” Turner said.
Paris Blockchain Week’s panel with Cointelegraph CEO Yana Prikhodchenko, Bancor co-founder Eyal Hertzog, Sygnum co-founder Thomas Eichenberger, Messari CEO Eric Turner, AWS fintech leader Alex Matsuo and Near chief operating officer Chris Donovan. Source: Cointelegraph
Sygnum co-founder Thomas Eichenberger said international banks with US branches are also poised to enter the market once the legal landscape becomes clearer:
“I think it’s a matter of fact that US banks are preparing to be able to offer crypto custody and at least crypto spot trading services anytime soon.”
“I think by then I would agree with you, Eric,” he continued, projecting a continued phase of market uncertainty until the US establishes a clear regulatory framework.
With the establishment of clear crypto rules for banks in the US, there will be a rush for crypto services by large international banks that are incorporated outside of the US but have a US-based presence, Eichenberger said.
“Some of them may have had their strategic plans in their cupboard to offer crypto-related services, but have been afraid that at some point they will be gone after by any of the US regulatory authorities,” he said, adding:
“Now I think there’s no one to be afraid of anymore in terms of regulatory authorities worldwide. So I think many of the large international banks will launch this year.”
Global trade tensions triggered by US President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff measures may come to an end with a potential deal with China as investors remain concerned about escalation from both sides.
Trump’s April 2 announcement of reciprocal import tariffs sent shockwaves through global equity and crypto markets. The measures include a 10% baseline tariff on all imported goods, effective April 5, with higher levies — such as a 34% tariff on Chinese imports — set to begin on April 9.
However, the tariff negotiations may only be “posturing” for the US to reach an agreement with China, according to Raoul Pal, founder and CEO of Global Macro Investor.
“In the end, almost all the other tariff negotiations and rhetoric are all about getting China to agree a deal,” Pal wrote in an April 8 X post, adding:
“That is the big prize and both China and the US understand it and need it. Everything else is negotiation posturing. China needs a weaker $ and the US needs tariffs.”
In response to US tariffs, China imposed a 34% tariff on all US imports effective April 10, media outlet Xinhua News reported on April 4. China’s foreign ministry also vowed to “fight till the end” against Trump’s tariffs, which it called “bullying” by the world’s largest economy.
China overtakes the US in global trade. Source: Econovis
China overtook the US in 2012 to become the world’s largest trading nation by the total value of exports and imports, surpassing $4 trillion in goods trade that year, according to The Guardian.
Crypto markets watch trade outcome closely
As the trade dispute continues to evolve, analysts say a potential agreement between the two global superpowers could serve as a key catalyst for recovery in digital asset markets.
Crypto markets have a 70% chance to bottom by June 2025 before recovering, Nansen analysts predicted.
Investor appetite for risk assets such as Bitcoin will depend on the global tariff responses from other countries, according to Nicolai Sondergaard, a research analyst at Nansen.
“We have reached somewhat of a local bottom in regard to tariffs and the impact on prices,” the analyst said during Cointelegraph’s Chainreaction live show on X, adding:
“Trump came out guns blazing, and we’ve mostly seen the worst from the US side, so we’ll see if other countries are willing to drop some of the tariffs because it’s very likely the US will do the same.”
A Nigerian court has reportedly delayed the country’s tax evasion case against Binance until April 30 to give time for Nigeria’s tax authority to respond to a request from the crypto exchange.
Reuters reported on April 7 that a lawyer for Binance, Chukwuka Ikwuazom, asked a court the same day to invalidate an order allowing for court documents to be served to the company via email.
Binance doesn’t have an office in Nigeria and Ikwuazom claimed the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) didn’t get court permission to serve court documents to Binance outside the country.
“On the whole the order for the substituted service as granted by the court on February 11, 2025 on Binance who is … registered under the laws of Cayman Islands and resident in Cayman Islands is improper and should be set aside,” he said.
FIRS sued Binance in February, claiming the exchange owed $2 billion in back taxes and should be made to pay $79.5 billion for damages to the local economy as its its operations allegedly destabilized the country’s currency, the naira, which Binance denies.
It also reportedly alleged that Binance is liable to pay corporate income tax in Nigeria, as it has a “significant economic presence” there, with FIRS requesting a court order for the exchange to pay income taxes for 2022 and 2023, plus a 10% annual penalty on unpaid amounts along with a nearly a 27% interest rate on the unpaid taxes.
Nigeria’s legal history with Binance
In February 2024, Nigeria arrested and detained Binance executives Tigran Gambaryan and Nadeem Anjarwalla on tax fraud and money laundering charges. The country dropped the tax charges against both in June and the remaining charge against Gambaryan in October.
Tigran Gambaryan (right) was seen in a September video struggling to walk into a courtroom in the Nigerian capital of Abuja. Source: X
Anjarwalla managed to slip his guards and escape Nigerian custody to Kenya in March last year and is apparently still at large.
Gambaryan, a US citizen, returned home in October after reports suggested his health had deteriorated during his detainment with reported cases of pneumonia, malaria and a herniated spinal disc that may need surgery.
Binance stopped its naira currency deposits and withdrawals in March 2024, effectively leaving the Nigerian market.