Roman Storm, the developer behind Tornado Cash, found himself entangled in legal proceedings when he was arrested last August and faced three charges related to his involvement as a co-founder of the Ethereum privacy protocol Tornado Cash. However, recent developments have seen him receive substantial support from three notable pro-crypto organizations in the form of amicus briefs.
Storm moved to have the charges against him dropped last week, asserting that the government’s argument was fundamentally flawed in its understanding of Tornado Cash’s service and the intricacies of blockchain technology. Meanwhile, his co-founder, Roman Semenov, remains at large, facing similar charges, while Alexey Pertsev, another co-founder, awaits the outcome of his trial in the Netherlands, with a verdict expected on May 14th.
The amicus briefs, submitted separately by Coin Center, the Blockchain Association, and the DeFi Education Fund, collectively challenge the government’s portrayal of the case in its indictment. They argue against the assertion that Tornado Cash operated as an unlicensed money transmitting business, a claim pivotal to the charges leveled against Storm and Semenov.
The Blockchain Association’s brief, for instance, highlights discrepancies between the government’s indictment and FinCEN’s definitions, stressing that Tornado Cash developers lack independent control over user assets, a crucial factor in determining money transmitter liability. Moreover, it warns that the government’s stance could effectively stifle the development of anonymizing protocols by rendering compliance with regulations impractical.
Coin Center’s brief focuses on countering charges related to violations of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) and invokes First Amendment protections in defense against the allegations. It argues that Storm’s actions cannot be equated with colluding with malicious entities, likening it to holding the developers of open-source software responsible for later misuse by unrelated parties.
Similarly, the DeFi Education Fund’s brief underscores the potential ramifications of a verdict against Storm, suggesting that it could set a dangerous precedent by exposing software developers to criminal liability for unforeseen future activities beyond their control.
As of now, government prosecutors have yet to respond to Storm’s motion seeking dismissal of the charges.
