Finally, there's a "currently non-public matter" that they also want to discuss with the judge – the nature of which has been redacted from court documents – which will be addressed in a conference to be held on December 15.
Something to do with all those confiscated Bitcoins probably
For its part, the government has asked that Ulbricht's lawyers be barred from discussing the consequences for Ulbricht should he be convicted,
What, such as being made to work for the spooks?
and they also don't want the jury to hear about Ulbricht's personal beliefs regarding drug laws or regulation of online commerce, saying it could lead to an "erroneous assumption that good motive is inconsistent with criminal intent.
So on the one hand they want to include evidence relating to an offence that he hasn't been convicted of (yet) but they don't want the jury to understand the guys motives and thought processes? Are they expecting an insanity plea or something if the jury hear what the guy really thinks? Or are they frightened the jury might think he has a point in some way?
Here's your cake, enjoy.