Blockchain transactions can be subpoenaed in legal proceedings, particularly when linked to cryptocurrency exchanges or other identifiable entry points. Courts can issue third-party subpoenas to platforms like Coinbase or Gemini, which maintain user data, including wallet addresses and transaction histories. Since blockchain transactions are pseudonymous rather than anonymous, investigators can often trace them through exchanges where fiat to crypto conversions occur. For example, in Strobel v. Lesnick, a plaintiff attempted to subpoena exchanges to identify wallet owners involved in suspect transactions, highlighting the viability of subpoenas in blockchain-related cases.

Blockchain evidence is increasingly recognized in legal proceedings across jurisdictions such as the U.S., U.K., and China. Some jurisdictions, like vermont, even treat blockchain records as self-authentication and hearsay rules. A notable example includes a chinese copyright case where blockchain snapshots were admitted after verifying hash values recorded on bitcoin and factcom blockchains.

While privacy concerns exist, U.S. courts have ruled that individuals do not have fourth amendment protections over cryptocurrency transaction records held by third-party exchanges. Cryptocurrencies designed for enhanced anonymity, such as monero, present greater challenges, but investigators can still track transactions through exchange entry and exit points. Additionally, forensic analysis of seized devices may uncover private keys or locally stored transaction records.

Legal practitioners increasingly rely on blockchain forensic tools to trace transactions across multiple wallets and uncover obfuscation techniques. The combination of subpoena power, forensic analysis, expert testimony allows courts to effectively use blockchain transaction records as evidence. Understanding these legal dynamics ensures compliance and strengthens investigative strategies in litigation involving digital assets.