‘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

AI "Transfer Station" Earning Millions Monthly? Five Questions Uncover the Truth of Token Arbitrage

The article "AI 'Transfer Station' Earns Millions Monthly? Five Questions Uncover the Truth of Token Arbitrage" explores the emerging business of API token transfer stations, which profit from global AI service price disparities and access barriers. These intermediaries purchase low-cost tokens from overseas AI providers (e.g., OpenAI, Claude) through grey-market methods—such as exploiting enterprise credits, bulk accounts, or subscription benefits—and resell them to Chinese users at a markup. Key drivers include the high cost of using top AI models (e.g., Claude Code costs ~$5 per million tokens), the performance gap between domestic and foreign models, and mismatches between subscription and API pricing. However, the practice carries significant risks: upstream token sources may be unstable or illegal; user data passing through intermediaries can be harvested or injected with hidden prompts; and models might be downgraded without disclosure. The market is evolving, with some operators now exporting cheaper Chinese models (e.g., Qwen3.5 at ~$0.11 per million tokens) to overseas users, leveraging price gaps. Yet, sustainability is low due to compliance crackdowns, instability, and reputational risks. Users are advised to employ detection methods (e.g., prompt adherence tests) and avoid sensitive data usage. The authors caution that while transfer stations offer short-term arbitrage, they lack long-term reliability and security compared to official APIs.

marsbitHace 50 min(s)

AI "Transfer Station" Earning Millions Monthly? Five Questions Uncover the Truth of Token Arbitrage

marsbitHace 50 min(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片