BanterBrains

ProveX is not going to interest anyone. That's some people's take. Here's what they are missing. Think for a moment, How many millions of people on Ethereum, Base, and Solana want to be able to sell their crypto for cash without a trail that leads to their bank account? ProveX solves that. Right now, every time you sell your crypto on Coinbase, Kraken, or Binance, there's a public trail. A trail that shows you got cash for your crypto. And if you bridge out, a trail that shows that cash went to your bank account. With ProveX, you send your crypto to an address, which looks like a normal token send to another wallet. Cash is sent to your bank account, which looks like a regular bank transfer from another bank. There is no connection between your crypto and the cash you received. ProveX settles the exchange using zero-knowledge proofs, verifying everything without exposing anything. Millions of people across every chain want exactly this! And yet they don't know it exists. ProveX is much bigger than people think.

Why jurisdiction isn’t a technicality, as so many seem to want to believe on this website. Starting to see BS floating around that Richard won on a technicality. It's not. Here's why. Jurisdiction is actually THE fundamental element of any case. As I’ve said many, many times on this website, it’s a pass/fail test. If you have it, you can proceed. If you don’t, the case is over. It’s the first of many hurdles on an obstacle course. If you can’t get over it, you fail immediately and you never even get to attempt any of the other obstacles, even if you’re 100% positive you can clear them. There is well-settled law dating back to the early 1800s that a court has no power to enter any judgments or orders "if the court that rendered it lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or if it acted in a manner inconsistent with due process of law." This quote is from Burke v Smith, 252 F.3d 1260, if anyone cares. But you can find cases like Rose v Himely dating back to 1808 that discuss the fundamental requirement of jurisdiction. In fact, any such orders or judgments would be VOID, not voidable, meaning that they have no force or effect whatsoever, and no party can even try to enforce them against another. The purposeful and directed attack on the SEC’s lack of jurisdiction over Richard by his legal team wasn’t “hey judge, let us off on a technicality,” it was “Hey judge, you don’t even have the authority to hear this case or enter any orders other than to dismiss it, because you don’t have jurisdiction over our client.” After her analysis of this argument, and finding she lacked jurisdiction over Richard, she had only two options: 1. Dismiss it. 2. Continue the case in violation of Richard’s due process rights, knowing full well that Richard can challenge any order or judgment she enters at any time between now and the end of the universe. Jurisdiction is such a critical component of the case that there are no time limits on attacking orders for lack of jurisdiction. You can’t ever strip someone of the right to challenge an order that lacked jurisdiction. If Thomas Jefferson rose from the grave tonight and wanted to challenge an order issued against him where the court lacked jurisdiction, he could file it. So yeah, if you want to consider the absolute minimum requirement necessary for a court to hear a case at all some kind of “technicality,” go right ahead. You’re wrong, though.

Another SEC case bites the dust.

This guys should apologize to Richard Heart.

Ill be praying for this $PLS