Vitalik’s FOCIL Proposal: Ethereum Neutrality vs. U.S. Sanctions

Buterin wants Ethereum censorship-proof. Critics warn it could put validators straight into Uncle Sam’s crosshairs.

⚡ Quick Hits

• 🧑‍💻 Proposal: Fork-Choice Enforced Inclusion Lists (FOCIL)
• 🎯 Goal: Stop block-builder oligopolies & censorship
• 🧱 Design: 17 proposers per slot (1 lead + 16 auxiliaries)
• ⚖️ Backlash: Legal risk under U.S. sanctions law
• 🔥 Critic: Ameen Soleimani — “FOCIL helps the U.S. gov prosecute ETH validators”

🧠 Buterin’s New Defense

Vitalik Buterin, Ethereum’s co-founder, wants ETH to stay a neutral “dumb pipe” — not a network where a few big builders decide what gets in.

His three anti-centralization defenses:

1. Public mempool → keep naive block building alive.
2. Distributed block-building tech → off-protocol diversity.
3. Fallback inclusion channels → guarantee transactions can’t be vetoed.

FOCIL = that third defense. Instead of one proposer, 17 validators get picked per slot:

• 1 lead sets transaction order.
• 16 auxiliaries pick transactions that must be included.

Vitalik’s pitch: even light, stateless validators could contribute. It’s censorship resistance, hard-coded.

“The goal is to prevent a block builder oligopoly from having a veto over transaction inclusion.” — Vitalik

⚖️ The Pushback: Tornado Cash Ghosts

Not everyone’s clapping. Ameen Soleimani (developer + outspoken critic) says FOCIL is a legal booby trap.

• He points to the Tornado Cash saga: 90% of validators avoided those txns to sidestep sanctions. That slowed blocks but kept validators legally safe.
• Under FOCIL, validators would be forced to include transactions — even those flagged by OFAC or the U.S. Treasury.

Ameen’s take:

“If I was the U.S. gov, I’d love FOCIL. ETH validators would incriminate themselves by including sanctioned txns. Then I can go after anyone on U.S. soil.”

He also doubts validator “altruism” will hold up under real-world legal risk.

🌍 Neutrality vs. Compliance

This is Ethereum’s eternal tightrope:

• Neutrality → don’t censor, don’t discriminate, keep the chain open.
• Compliance → survive regulators who see crypto as fair game for sanctions.

FOCIL is Vitalik’s way of baking censorship resistance into the protocol. But critics fear it just hands regulators an easy target list.

It’s not just about code — it’s about whether Ethereum can stay decentralized and censorship-proof in a world where regulators play hardball.

🧭 Bigger Picture

Ethereum is now a trillion-dollar economy. With that weight comes institutional scrutiny.

• Vitalik’s vision = technical purity, no vetoes.
• Critics’ fear = validators become sitting ducks for prosecution.
• The clash = whether ETH can balance ideology with survival.

The FOCIL debate may end up shaping Ethereum’s future more than any hard fork.

TL;DR

• Vitalik Buterin proposes FOCIL → multiple proposers per slot to stop censorship.
• Would force inclusion of transactions, even if flagged by sanctions.
• Critics (Ameen Soleimani) say this puts validators & devs in direct legal danger.
• The fight = Ethereum neutrality vs. regulatory compliance.
• Ethereum’s next evolution hinges on whether it can resist centralization and survive the law.