I’ve been working on something I’m excited to share: the Wyoming GRANITE Act (Guaranteeing Rights Against Novel International Tyranny & Extortion).
The problem is straightforward. Foreign governments are increasingly trying to enforce their censorship laws against Americans. Ofcom threatening 4chan with $25 million fines for violating the UK’s Online Safety Act. Brazilian judges ordering X to censor accounts or face shutdown. The EU’s DSA. These aren’t hypotheticals. They’re happening now.
The federal government has done little. The SPEECH Act from 2010 blocks recognition of foreign defamation judgments that wouldn’t survive First Amendment scrutiny, but that’s narrow. There’s no comprehensive federal response to the broader problem of foreign censorship enforcement against US persons.
What the GRANITE Act does:
- Creates a private right of action for Wyoming residents and entities targeted by foreign censorship enforcement
- Establishes that transmitting a censorship threat into Wyoming constitutes purposeful availment (satisfying minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction)
- Provides serious remedies: treble damages, $10M statutory damages (inflation-adjusted via M2), or 10% of US-related revenue, whichever is greater
- Makes foreign censorship judgments unenforceable in Wyoming courts
- Prohibits state cooperation with foreign censorship enforcement, including refusing to honor international assistance requests that conflict with the act
- Imposes personal civil penalties on state employees who knowingly assist foreign censorship enforcement (no qualified immunity, no indemnification for willful violations)
Why this matters for Bitcoin:
Wyoming has positioned itself as a jurisdiction friendly to digital innovation. That regulatory clarity means nothing if foreign governments can threaten Wyoming-based projects into compliance with their speech codes. A Bitcoin company in Wyoming shouldn’t have to worry about EU “disinformation” rules or UK “online safety” mandates.
The act also protects pseudonymous speech. If you’re running a project from Wyoming and some foreign regulator demands you unmask your users or moderate content to their standards, this gives you a weapon to fight back.
The legal architecture:
The bill is carefully drafted to work within federal constraints. It doesn’t purport to waive foreign sovereign immunity, which is governed by the FSIA. But it does create causes of action against foreign officials (who don’t enjoy the same immunity) and positions Wyoming to take advantage of FSIA exceptions like commercial activity.
The joint and several liability provision is important. Foreign officials may be judgment-proof, but foreign states often maintain assets or commercial relationships in the US. The act lets plaintiffs pursue both.
Current status:
I’ve been describing v.3 of the draft above. I’m continuing to refine it but the overarching themes are in place, and v.4 has some great additions.
It’ll be introduced in the 2026 session. I wrote it, gave it to a great legislator, and will be helping shepherd it through the session.
Happy to answer questions. This is the kind of thing states can do, and Wyoming intends to lead.