Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Crypto fraud case
Crypto fraud case

Cryptocurrency

A US judge has temporarily blocked Arkansas from enforcing laws on cryptocurrency miners

A federal judge has temporarily blocked Arkansas from implementing rules against foreign-owned crypto mining operations, siding with a naturalized US citizen accused of breaking the laws.

A federal judge in Little Rock, Arkansas, has temporarily blocked the execution of two state laws that limit foreign ownership of land and digital asset mining enterprises. The decision came after Jones Eagle LLC, a bitcoin mining firm, challenged the laws on constitutional grounds.

Qimin “Jimmy” Chen, the company’s principal owner and a naturalized US citizen of Chinese origin, filed the complaint after Arkansas officials attempted to shut down his business. The state claimed that Chen’s ownership violated Acts 636 and 174, which prohibit persons and corporations affiliated with foreign countries, primarily China, from holding property or operating digital mining facilities in Arkansas.

Chen claimed that the legislation unfairly discriminated against him based on his national origin. Chief U.S. District Judge Kristine Baker agreed to temporarily suspend the execution of the statutes, noting probable irreparable injury to Chen’s business and image. After 14 days, a hearing will determine whether to extend the restraining order.

Chen’s attorney, Alex Jones, applauded the judge’s ruling, adding that it will let his client continue functioning while preparing to challenge the regulations as illegal. The lawsuit claims that Chen provided documents demonstrating his adherence to state standards and tried to clarify his citizenship status with Arkansas officials, but they refused to meet.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the governor of Arkansas, stated that she intends to appeal the verdict, arguing that the rules are required to safeguard the state from foreign influence. The public’s growing concern about foreign espionage led to the passage of Act 636 in particular.

The court battle highlights the contradiction between state restrictions and constitutional safeguards, particularly in companies such as cryptocurrency, which operate in a worldwide market. The decision in the lawsuit may have far-reaching repercussions for how governments deal with foreign ownership of new technologies.

author avatar
Sagar Saini
A dedicated freelance blogger with a strong passion for finance and business, With a keen interest in the world of cryptocurrency.
Advertisement

You May Also Like

Exclusive

A look into the meme coin that is ruling social media and Solana. In crypto, memes don’t just stay memes anymore. There is money...

Exclusive

FARTCOIN is one of the most popular memecoins of 2025. FARTCOIN is a cryptocurrency that stands for Fungible Arthur Robotic Token coin. FARTCOIN is...

Cryptocurrency

Cryptocurrency exchange Bitget faced an unexpected disruption on April 20 as trading on the futures contract VOXEL/USDT exploded. According to their statement, within 30...

Finance

Big names in crypto like Circle and BitGo plan to file applications for banking charters in the United States, similar to the WSJ. The...

polkadot
Polkadot (DOT) $ 4.25 0.81%
bitcoin
Bitcoin (BTC) $ 94,132.00 0.82%
ethereum
Ethereum (ETH) $ 1,793.61 0.81%
cardano
Cardano (ADA) $ 0.707107 1.44%
xrp
XRP (XRP) $ 2.20 0.11%
stellar
Stellar (XLM) $ 0.290576 1.80%
litecoin
Litecoin (LTC) $ 86.02 0.32%