Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody is talking about being compelled to accept cash - we are talking about cash being used in a manner that is, arbitrarily illegal after a certain amount.
What were you saying "If cash is legal tender, then any amount is, by default, legal" meant? The only meaning of "legal tender" is that someone with a court judgment against you can be compelled to accept legal tender. It doesn't say anything about whether it's legal for you to use it in other transactions.
I’m sorry my use of the word “legal” in the context of “legally acceptable tender” triggered this response. You’ll have to forgive me: English is my first language.
I will try again:
The use of cash, if agreed upon by parties involved, is legal because it’s a government “backed”/“accepted” item of currency. Tendering cash in this transaction is legal. (You’re not trading a car for $value in meth or guns..)
A gov is now saying, no matter how legal the use of cash is, after a certain amount it is no longer legal.
This is, in my opinion and with my beliefs, an overreach and quite frankly nonsense. It is no surprise, but saddening all the same. That is all.