Author
Ahmed Balaha
Author
Share it
The DOJ core legal theory in Roman Storm crypto case There has never been a time when writing laws is a crime. It is that managing a platform that handles more than $1 billion in illegal money – while flatly refusing to implement anti-money laundering measures – constitutes a criminal enterprise.
That distinction is what makes this case even more valuable than Tornado Cash.
Prosecutors wrote a letter Tuesday rejecting Storm’s attempt to support the Supreme Court’s decision in March. Sony Music v. Cox Communications as grounds for dismissal.
The DOJ called this analogy “unacceptable” – and the reason for the rejection refers precisely to the extent of developer involvement that constitutes a state crime under the existing framework.
An unanswered question: where is the legal environment for DeFi developers who promote protocols, manage governance, and selectively respond to outcomes? As of Tuesday’s filing, the bottom line is still unclear — and prosecutors are pushing to make Storm’s case the center of gravity.
- Attempt to Remove: Storm’s attorneys cited the Supreme Court’s Cox decision — which protected ISPs from being sued for violating users’ rights — as an example of decriminalization. DOJ prosecutors rejected the analogy saying it didn’t apply to Storm’s behavior.
- The Control Argument: Prosecutors documented more than 250 changes made to Tornado Cash at the time of the indictment, directly contradicting Storm’s defense that the protocol was immutable beyond its control. That work history is very important in an embezzlement case.
- Partial Validation: A jury in August 2025 convicted Storm of conspiracy to operate an illegal money transfer business but failed to commit money laundering and evasion – prosecutors are seeking a retrial in October 2026.
- Basic Basics: The DOJ’s formulation – that developers who change and abandon the process are intentionally implemented by operators, not bystanders – applies directly to the DeFi protocol that can be modified by founders or large groups.
- Exposure: Storm faces 40-45 years in prison if convicted of all charges. The retrial process involves two cases that have been dismissed; the money transfer decision stops.
- Must Watch: The meeting between the defense of Storm and the court of Judge Katherine Polk Failla will determine whether October 2026 will be the date for retrial – the exact process is the next step that confirms or forces this time.
Check out: The best pre-market stocks with asymmetric upside potential
What the DOJ’s Rejection of Cox Establishes – and Why ‘Immutable Code’ Defenses Are Ending on the Road
Storm’s legal team drew another parallel: the Supreme Court found that Cox Communications should not be prosecuted for violating the user agreement because Cox had a strict, 98%-effective policy to eliminate repeat offenders.
The argument was that Storm, like Cox, was neutral. Prosecutors settled the suit in separate filings.
The DOJ’s letter to Judge Failla emphasized that Cox get frustrated quickly illegal activity taking place on its network – while Mkuntho and his partners at Tornado Cash did the opposite.
Prosecutors said that Storm “lied in response to the questions that were asked, telling them that he had no control over the process when he and his colleagues changed more than 250 things in the Tornado Cash infrastructure during the time they were accused and discussed clearly – but continued – the possibility of solving crimes on their platform.”
This last paragraph is legally binding. Under the anti-money laundering and unauthorized remittance laws, the question isn’t whether the developer wrote the code – it’s whether they used a method they knew was being used. spending moneyhe had the power to prevent that use, and he chose not to.
The Bank Secrecy Act’s anti-money laundering provisions apply to employees, not just bystanders. The position of the opposition is that Storm was a user in any way.
“In short, the actions of the defendant in the criminal use of his company were window-dressing and mismanagement in the worst possible way” – the letter of the prosecutors to Judge Failla, wrote on Tuesday.
The judge’s decision of August 2025 on the accounting of unauthorized payments has already rejected the developer of Storm software once.
The October 2026 retrial will focus on the money laundering and wiretapping charges directly — the charges in which the jury was out, not in which they were acquitted. This distinction is important: a failure means that the twelve judges did not agree, not that the evidence was insufficient to judge.
Discover: The Best Crypto Presales Right Now
