Code vs. Crime: Tornado Cash Dev Roman Storm Faces Pivotal Money Laundering Trial

The crypto world holds its breath as Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm heads to court Monday—a trial that could redefine the boundaries of decentralized finance.

When privacy tech meets the law

The prosecution alleges Storm's code knowingly facilitated money laundering, while defenders argue he simply built tools—like handing out locksmith tools that burglars might use. The case cuts to the heart of crypto's eternal tension: innovation versus regulation.

Wall Street's watching—and probably shorting

Bankers will be following this one between martini lunches, secretly hoping for a precedent that keeps their AML compliance teams employed for another decade. Meanwhile, DeFi builders brace for impact—will writing open-source code soon require a law degree?

The verdict could send shockwaves through crypto

Win or lose, this trial's already changed the game. Either outcome sets a landmark precedent for developer liability—and potentially reshapes how privacy tools get built in the post-Tornado Cash era.

Shifting winds

Storm’s trial begins as the U.S. government continues to overhaul its approach to the crypto industry — particuarly crypto regulation. Under U.S. President Donald Trump, the WHITE House has taken a friendlier stance towards the industry (which poured a whopping $130 million into congressional races in the 2024 elections and at least $18 million into Trump’s inaugural committee alone), nudging regulators and law enforcement to do the same.

Since TRUMP took office in January, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission — which had taken on a bogeyman-like status under former Chair Gary Gensler for its so-called practice of “regulation by enforcement" — has formed an industry-friendly Crypto Task Force and dropped a slew of open cases and investigations into crypto companies. In an April memo to staff, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche ordered U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) staff to “narrow” their focus on crypto crime, instructing them that the agency would no longer be charging regulatory violations in cases involving crypto.

Though some speculated that prosecutors would back down from their case against Storm in the wake of Blanche’s memo, the government pressed forward, dropping just one part of one charge. Prosecutors also opted to continue with their case against Storm in March after the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) delisted Tornado Cash from their list of sanctioned entities, after a federal judge ruled that the agency could not sanction a smart contract.

“Frankly, I was kind of surprised it was going forward after we saw that [Tornado Cash] was taken off the OFAC list,” Bini said. “We don’t know the government’s evidence yet, but we’ve seen the Trump Administration really MOVE away from these sort of regulatory-type cases. And this seems like one that is on the edges of that because the conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business [charge] does seem like the type of regulatory case that perhaps the Administration is getting out of the business of.”

Storm on trial

During a pre-trial conference last week, District Judge Katherine Polk Failla of the Southern District of New York (SDNY) ruled that neither side could bring up the OFAC sanctions — either that Tornado Cash was sanctioned in the first place or that the sanctions were subsequently removed — during Storm’s trial, arguing that it would confuse the jury. Failla also ruled that neither party could mention the outcome of a related civil case, Van Loon vs. Department of the Treasury.

Bini told CoinDesk that Failla’s ruling to keep the OFAC sanctions out of the trial is likely to help the government’s case more than Storm’s.

If the defense was able to tell the jury that OFAC’s sanctions were later dropped, Bini said, “I think you’re more likely to have jurors say ‘gosh, I’m not sure of whether this is illegal or not.’ And if they’re not sure, well, then the defendant is not guilty. I think that ruling probably helped the government to some extent in making the case seem cleaner and less complicated.”

Bini said that, if the trial results in a conviction, Failla’s ruling presents potential grounds for Storm’s lawyers to appeal.

“The defense may say, 'hey, we should have had the right to present that to the jury, we think that’s important evidence,’” he said. “This is the type of case where even if the government gets a conviction as they usually do, there really may be some legal infirmities.”

If the jury finds Storm guilty, Bini said that there might be another option beyond an appeal — a presidential pardon. Trump has pardoned a number of people in the crypto industry since taking office in January, including the co-founders of BitMEX and Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht.

“Let’s say it results in a conviction, that doesn’t mean that the President might not get involved afterwards,” Bini said. “That’s a bit of a wild card that we could see play out here if the case results in a conviction.”

In a final pre-trial conference on Friday, Storm’s lawyers made a last-ditch effort to get the case dismissed after the government revealed that its theory of venue (basically, the prosecution’s justification to bring the case in the Southern District of New York) hinged on three pieces of evidence — Storm’s texts to a New York-based venture capitalist, Storm’s interview with a New York-based Bloomberg reporter and the fact that a hacker accessed Tornado Cash from New York.

Failla ultimately ruled against the defense’s motion, allowing the government’s case against Storm to proceed to trial.

The next four weeks

Storm’s trial, initially slated for two weeks, is expected to run a full month due to the sheer number of witnesses in the case. The government alone told the court it planned to call more than 20 people to testify, including a hacker who used Tornado Cash, a so-called “victim” witness and a host of expert witnesses.

Jury selection is expected to take two days, with opening arguments likely slated for Wednesday.

Storm has not yet indicated either way whether he will testify in his own defense, but Bini said it could be a big help for his defense.

“I think there’s a really good chance [Storm] will testify. If so, [he’s] going to have to withstand some really stiff cross [examination], but that could be really powerful in a case like this,” Bini said. “The burden is on the government, not the [defense], but they might want to take the stand and tell the jury their story.”