 I think that the important thing for folks to know about the Bank Secrecy Act is that it effectively imposes reporting requirements on banks so that for certain financial transactions, those are turned over to the government without a warrant and mass by defaults. So the issue here is that instead of law enforcement having to go get a warrant in order to get particular financial information, not only do they have the ability to just go to financial institutions and get that information, but actually it gets turned over to them by default. So a warrant means you have to go in one by one and get information about a particular crime or a particular person. A subpoena lets you go a little more broadly without having probable cause or a judge sign off. And what I'm hearing is the Bank Secrecy Act actually flips that on its head and it starts out that the government gets the information rather than having to go through any hoops at all. Is that a fair summary? Exactly. Exactly. And that is exactly why I think that it is pretty shocking that it's... I think that this is something that is, in my view, clearly violates the Fourth Amendment. And I really find it shocking that this is something that we see in our society today as being totally normal and acceptable, that somehow financial surveillance is different than other surveillance.