Defense counsel moves to exclude. The authentication foundation is insufficient. No human created this record, no human can authenticate it, and there is no specific rule that addresses what it is.
That motion is going to keep coming. Courts are handling machine-generated records at a pace the existing rules weren't written for: automated sensor data, GPS logs, server timestamps, blockchain anchors. Practitioners have been stretching FRE 901(b)(9) and 902(13) to cover them. That works. But it's a workaround, and the Judicial Conference apparently agreed. Proposed FRE 707, approved in June 2025, was designed to fill this gap directly. The public comment period ran through February 2026 and is now closed. Here is what the proposed rule's framework means for blockchain-anchored evidence.
The Gap in Existing Rules
FRE 901(b)(9) authenticates evidence produced by a process that generates an accurate result. It has worked for blockchain records, but it requires foundation, typically expert testimony or certification establishing that the process is reliable. For a technology with a decade-plus track record and public cryptographic documentation, that foundation requirement is often more friction than it should be.
