A reported Bitcoin transfer by the U.S. Marshals Service has sparked debate in Washington after appearing to conflict with President Trump’s directive on the handling of seized digital assets.
At the center of the controversy is a 57.55 BTC transaction, valued at roughly $6.3 million at the time, which was reportedly moved by the U.S. Marshals Service on November 3, 2025. The Bitcoin had been seized from developers associated with Samourai Wallet as part of a plea agreement.
Alleged Sale Conflicts With Strategic Reserve Policy
According to transaction tracking, the Bitcoin was transferred to an address linked to Coinbase Prime. The destination wallet was later emptied, strongly suggesting the assets were sold rather than retained.
This apparent liquidation has drawn scrutiny because it appears to run counter to Executive Order 14233, signed by President Trump in March 2025. The order mandates that Bitcoin obtained through criminal or civil forfeiture be held in a U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and explicitly prohibits its sale.
Inter-Agency Policy Tension
Historically, the U.S. Marshals Service has liquidated seized assets to fund law enforcement operations and compensate victims. That long-standing procedure appears to have been followed in this case, despite the newer presidential directive.
The situation suggests either a policy misalignment or differing interpretations between the Department of Justice, which oversees the Marshals Service, and the White House’s digital asset strategy.
Political and Administrative Reactions
The reported transfer prompted concern from Cynthia Lummis, a prominent Bitcoin advocate, who said she was “deeply concerned” by the report.
Meanwhile, Patrick Witt, Executive Director of the President’s Council of Advisors for Digital Assets, confirmed that the Trump administration is reviewing the matter.
Broader Implications
The episode highlights unresolved questions around inter-agency coordination, especially as federal Bitcoin policy evolves rapidly. While the executive order establishes a clear framework for strategic Bitcoin custody, its practical enforcement across federal agencies appears to remain a work in progress.
As scrutiny continues, the incident underscores the challenges of implementing a unified digital asset policy within the federal government.
