Code, Coins, and Conviction: The Legacy of United States v. Roman Storm
The federal government successfully moved code from the 'witness stand' to the 'guilty' column. This landmark case marks the conclusion of the most aggressive battle between financial privacy and the Bank Secrecy Act.
In the landmark case of United States v. Roman Storm (Case No. 1:23-cr-00430) in the Southern District of New York, the federal government successfully moved code from the "witness stand" to the "guilty" column. The resolution of this case against the Tornado Cash co-founder marks the conclusion of the most aggressive legal battle to date between financial privacy and the Bank Secrecy Act—with the government emerging victorious.
The "Software vs. Service" Verdict
The trial centered on whether Roman Storm and his team were mere authors of code or active facilitators of a massive laundering operation.
The Proven Allegations
The prosecution successfully argued that Storm facilitated the laundering of over $1 billion in criminal proceeds, specifically highlighting the protocol's role in processing funds for the Lazarus Group, North Korea's state-sponsored hacking unit.
The Government's Success
The DOJ convinced the court that Tornado Cash was never "neutral code." It was ruled to be a functional, unlicensed money-transmitting business that the founders maintained and profited from, despite clear evidence of its use in international cyber-heists.
The Failed "Immutable" Defense
Storm's legal team attempted a defense rooted in First Amendment protections for open-source code. They argued that because the smart contracts were "immutable," the developers lacked the physical control required to be classified as money transmitters. The court's decision effectively rejected this, setting a precedent that deployment does not absolve a developer of regulatory responsibility.
The Aftermath: Why This Changed Everything
This case served as the "Big Bang" for Decentralized Finance (DeFi) regulation. By securing a conviction, the government has signaled that developers can be held criminally liable for the downstream actions of anonymous users. This ruling has fundamentally altered the landscape for crypto-privacy, creating a high-risk environment that is already driving decentralized development away from US jurisdictions.
Explore This Case
Use AskLexi to search the actual court documents from this case.