DOJ Urges Judge to Reject Roman Storm’s Venue Challenge

Federal prosecutors are urging a New York judge to reject Roman Storm’s challenge to the venue for two conspiracy counts, citing a recent Bitcoin Fog appeal. The filing comes as Treasury withdraws a proposed reporting and recordkeeping rule for international crypto mixers, but that policy change does not resolve Storm’s criminal case.

Why it matters

Storm, a Tornado Cash co-founder, already has an August 2025 conviction on one money-transmission conspiracy count, which carries a statutory maximum of five years. His retrial is scheduled for April 26, 2027, under an August 25, 2026 court order. The pending venue challenge concerns separate money-laundering and money-transmission conspiracy counts.

Prosecutors cite the D.C. Circuit’s September 25 decision in the Bitcoin Fog case as persuasive authority. They argue that deposits by a Manhattan customer helped enlarge Tornado Cash’s anonymity pool and that serving a customer in the district supports venue for the money-transmission count. Storm disputes the government’s treatment of his software work as criminal conduct.

Treasury’s FinCEN is withdrawing its 2023 proposal, citing concerns about burdens on financial institutions and a chilling effect on legitimate activity. The agency recognizes lawful financial privacy while retaining monitoring for illicit finance. The withdrawal changes an administrative reporting proposal, not criminal law or the charges against Storm.

Market impact

The case tests where prosecutors draw the line between building or maintaining privacy software and knowingly participating in criminal activity. A 2025 DOJ memo discouraged some mixer-related prosecutions but preserved an exception for funds known to come from crime or intended for unlawful activity. Later DOJ guidance described protections for qualifying decentralized software, while leaving room for charges where criminal intent exists.

The outcome could shape legal risk for privacy developers, but Treasury’s policy shift is not a ruling in Storm’s case. The next signals are court decisions on his challenges and any changes to the retrial schedule.