If Samourai in particular (the entity, not its protocol/code) pops up again via a Tor hidden service or something, that would be banned. There's no need to ban links to already-seized sites.

Other trustless CoinJoin services are still allowed. This case seems largely to rely on an idiosyncratic issue with Samourai, namely that there were allegedly instances of Samourai devs very directly marketing to people committing crimes.

I feel that this sort of thing justifies my decision, which was based in part on seeing a pattern of increasing "squeezing" of privacy services. This Samourai action is in-line with my predicted trend, which I think will only get worse. Since I am not surprised by this sort of action, it does not make me want to expand the mixer definition.

---

There's a giant institution with guns out there which wants to destroy every centralized, destroyable component they can find related to privacy. Every centralized privacy service is at risk of being nuked from orbit at any moment, and you want to be nowhere near the strike zone. I think that the legal argument against Samourai is fairly weak, but the law is only ink on a piece of paper: it has no magical powers to protect you. I wouldn't be surprised if the Samourai devs win their case in the end, but their lives are still going to be ruined for at least the next few years, and they'll probably be bankrupted. The fact is that the powers-that-be want these things destroyed, and they're eventually going to find ways of destroying them, if there's any way to do so.

I'm certainly not saying that privacy is a lost cause, but this environment requires a much higher standard of robustness and decentralization. This isn't as free a world as it was when Bitcoin was first created.