‘Disappointing’: U.S. DoJ seeks retrial of Tornado Cash founder

ambcryptoPublicado a 2026-03-10Actualizado a 2026-03-10

Resumen

The U.S. Department of Justice is seeking a retrial of Tornado Cash founder Roman Storm on charges of money laundering and sanctions violations, a move that has drawn strong criticism from the crypto community. Storm was previously found guilty only of operating an unlicensed money-transmitting business. The DeFi community, including the DeFi Education Fund and Solana Policy Institute, expressed disappointment, arguing the case threatens legal protections for software developers. They point to a recent court ruling that exempted developers from liability on non-custodial platforms. Critics also accuse the DoJ of contradicting the U.S. Treasury's stance and undermining crypto innovation. Despite the negative news, Tornado Cash’s native token TORN saw a 4% price increase.

U.S. government agencies are eliciting conflicting views on crypto mixers and DeFi software developers.

The above rift has become evident in the latest push by the Department of Justice (DoJ) to retry the Tornado Cash founder, Roman Storm.

In a letter sent to the Southern District of New York’s (SDNY) Judge Katherine Polk Failla, the DoJ requested the retrial to begin in October 2026.

Community opposes DoJ’s push for retrial

However, the DeFi and crypto community has raised concerns about the planned retrial.

In particular, Amanda Tuminelli, chief legal officer and executive director at lobby group DeFi Education Fund, billed the update as ‘incredibly disappointing news.’

Last year, Tornado Cash founder Roman Storm was charged with three counts: conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business (MTB), money laundering, and violations of sanctions.

But he was only found guilty of running an unlicensed MTB, which attracted a five-year jail sentence. However, the jury was undecided on the two other counts, and each could fetch a 20-year sentence if Storm is found guilty. These are the charges the DoJ is seeking to retry.

Moreover, Roman Storm criticized SDNY prosecutors for overstepping their role, undermining President Donald Trump’s crypto agenda, and disregarding the U.S. Treasury’s latest directive.

Here, Storm was referring to the U.S. Treasury’s latest report on crypto mixers, which characterized the products as ‘unlawful.’

“Lawful users of digital assets may leverage mixers to enable financial privacy when transacting through public blockchains.”

DeFi developers’ protections at risk

Similarly, a recent landmark Uniswap ruling established that scammers were liable for any wrongdoing and losses incurred on non-custodial platforms.

The ruling exempted developers from legal liability and, by extension, was viewed by many policy watchers as a positive sign for DeFi. In fact, the Unsiwap ruling was issued by Judge Failla, who is handling the Storm case.

However, the DoJ’s push for a retrial runs counter to the above ruling and the U.S. Treasury statement, further putting DeFi developers’ protection in limbo.

Reacting to the update, Solana Policy Institute’s CEO Miller Whitehouse-Levine called the retrial push ‘depressing’ but vowed to support Storm.

For his part, David Hoffman of Bankless pleaded with the Trump Administration to drop the charges against Storm.

“If the USA wants to be the Crypto Capital of the world, we need to protect our open-source developers. Please simply pardon Roman Storm from a charge leftover from the Biden admin.”

Interestingly, TORN, Tornado Cash’s native token, surged 4% despite the negative update.


Final Summary

  • The DoJ is pushing for the retrial of Roman Storm for sanctions violations and money laundering.
  • The crypto community expressed disappointment with the update as software developers’ protections hang in the balance.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat are the three charges that Tornado Cash founder Roman Storm was originally facing?

ARoman Storm was originally charged with three counts: conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business (MTB), money laundering, and violations of sanctions.

QWhy is the DeFi and crypto community concerned about the Department of Justice's push for a retrial?

AThe community is concerned because the retrial push runs counter to a recent landmark Uniswap ruling that exempted developers from legal liability, putting the protections for DeFi software developers in jeopardy.

QWhat was the outcome of Roman Storm's initial trial, and which charge was he found guilty of?

AIn the initial trial, the jury found Roman Storm guilty of running an unlicensed money-transmitting business (MTB), which carries a five-year jail term. The jury was undecided on the charges of money laundering and sanctions violations.

QHow did the U.S. Treasury's latest report characterize crypto mixers, and what did it say about their lawful users?

AThe U.S. Treasury's latest report characterized crypto mixers as 'unlawful.' However, it also noted that 'Lawful users of digital assets may leverage mixers to enable financial privacy when transacting through public blockchains.'

QWho is the judge presiding over the Roman Storm case, and why is her previous ruling significant in this context?

AJudge Katherine Polk Failla of the Southern District of New York (SDNY) is presiding over the case. She is significant because she issued the recent Uniswap ruling that established developers are not liable for scams on non-custodial platforms, a decision that contrasts with the DoJ's push for a retrial against Storm.

Lecturas Relacionadas

From Cash to Crypto: Towards a Consistent Regulatory Approach to Illicit Payments

"From Cash to Crypto: Towards a Consistent Regulatory Approach to Illicit Payments" by Andrea Minto et al. (BIS) examines the challenges for Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) regulation posed by the diversification of payment instruments, from cash and bank deposits to cryptoassets and CBDCs. The paper introduces a conceptual framework centered on the degree of intermediary involvement in a payment tool. It identifies a "waterbed effect": as regulators tighten AML/CFT rules on one type of instrument (e.g., bank transfers), illicit activity may shift to less-regulated alternatives with lower detection probabilities (e.g., self-hosted crypto wallets). This regulatory arbitrage undermines overall effectiveness. The framework categorizes payment tools as either intermediary-dependent (e.g., bank deposits, e-money, custodial wallets) where regulated entities perform checks, or non-intermediated (e.g., cash, self-hosted wallets, offline CBDCs) which offer higher anonymity and pose greater detection challenges. Malicious actors are assumed to choose tools that minimize their risk of detection. A case study of the EU's evolving AML/CFT regime illustrates this dynamic, showing how regulation has expanded over time to cover new entities like Crypto-Asset Service Providers (CASPs). However, inconsistencies remain, such as transaction limits for cash but not yet for self-hosted wallets or offline digital euro transactions. The paper concludes by proposing a dual regulatory approach: a *lex generalis* establishing a unified baseline of core obligations for all intermediated tools, and a *lex specialis* with tailored rules for non-intermediated instruments (e.g., transaction limits for cash and offline CBDCs, enhanced "touch point" monitoring for self-hosted wallets). This aims to create a more effective, consistent, and forward-looking framework that balances financial integrity with considerations for user privacy and innovation.

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

From Cash to Crypto: Towards a Consistent Regulatory Approach to Illicit Payments

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片