How would you change this protection in order to address your concerns while still serving the important purpose of protecting legislators from retaliation?
So what’s the noun for someone who lives in the modern world who doesn’t even think about religion because it has no impact on the vast majority of people’s lives, is not affected in any way by religion, has never met anyone who pushed their religion on them
Proof-of-work based crypto has been a disaster. It consumes huge amounts of electricity and other natural resources but produces nothing of intrinsic value. It's spawned whole new criminal enterprises committing whole new categories of crime.
Cryptocurrency in general has been an abject failure. It has not become a genuine currency. It is not a store nor a measure of value; it's value is measured in fiat currencies. It's closer to a commodity, but unlike actual commodities you can't use crypto to make anything useful.
99.99%+ of cryptocurrencies are Ponzi schemes designed to enrich the person or persons who started it. That's why everyone and their dog is setting up their own cryptocurrencies. If crypto actually lived up to its promise of being decentralized and impossible to manipulate there wouldn't be a new type of coin being invented every 5 minutes.
Historically, this protection was a necessary limit on the prosecutorial power of the executive/king.
Simply throwing it out seems like an over reaction that doesn't take into account the actual justifications for its existence.