[yieldcrv]

I think there are procedural issues not statutory ones. Procedure can undermine the statutory one, in this case there is a requirement for an entity to be able to argue on its own behalf to be removed from the sanctions list, this is not possible with the Tornado Cash contract addresses.

There is also the issue of determining how it is a Foreign Asset to begin with. Is it based on the developer they identified? They have to prove that it was not deployed by an American which probably cannot be proven by the nodes (maybe records of an API could do it, but not when running your own nodes)

[woodruffw]

This is an interesting point, but is it uniformly true? The OFAC list also includes aircraft and boats, which presumably can't argue on their own behalf.

[yieldcrv]

The owner and organization can argue

Tornado Cash autonomous contracts cannot. They need to establish proof of who or what organization deployed it. I believe they skipped this step for incompetence or for needing it clarified in court