DOJ Signals Measured Enforcement Approach for Crypto Developers

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has seemingly signaled a shift in its enforcement approach toward decentralized software developers, following the conclusion of its case against Roman Storm, co-founder of Tornado Cash [1]. In a statement delivered by Acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew R. Galeotti at the American Innovation Project Summit, the DOJ emphasized that the mere act of writing code does not constitute criminal intent [1]. This marks a departure from prior aggressive stances, where developers were sometimes prosecuted for the misuse of their tools by others.

Galeotti stated that the DOJ’s focus is on “bad actors” who intentionally commit crimes, rather than on the creation of neutral tools [1]. This position aligns with the jury’s split verdict in Storm’s trial, where he was found guilty of unlicensed money transmission but not of violating sanctions or money laundering [1]. His defense argued that, due to the decentralized nature of the platform, he had no control over how others used it—arguments that appear to have been taken into account in the DOJ’s evolving strategy.

The DOJ now appears to prioritize enforcement against clear cases of willful non-compliance, particularly in areas such as fraud, money laundering, and sanctions evasion [1]. This reflects a broader effort to apply existing financial regulations to digital assets in a consistent manner. The agency also reiterated its stance against using criminal charges as a regulatory tool—a position outlined in a memo by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, which ended the use of prosecution-based regulation in the crypto sector [1].

For the crypto development community, these remarks offer a potential shield from legal exposure for tools that are inherently neutral in design [1]. The DOJ’s emphasis on criminal intent, rather than mere technical involvement, may create a more predictable legal environment. This could encourage innovation without the fear of retroactive liability for the unauthorized or unintended use of open-source software.

However, it is still unclear whether this represents a formal policy shift or merely a contextual observation in the context of Storm’s case. The DOJ has not issued updated guidelines or formal statements to confirm a broader strategy change. Nonetheless, the message from Galeotti and the outcome of Storm’s trial suggest a more measured enforcement approach.

The DOJ has also demonstrated a commitment to targeting actual criminal behavior, as seen in recent actions against a China-based money laundering network and a $225 million civil forfeiture related to crypto fraud [1]. These actions highlight that while the DOJ aims to protect innovation, it remains vigilant in pursuing those who exploit the ecosystem for illegal purposes.

This case underscores the DOJ’s intent to distinguish between legitimate developers and those who engage in malicious activity. By not re-prosecuting dropped charges and by focusing on criminal intent, the DOJ appears to be fostering an environment where good-faith developers can operate without undue legal risk.

Sources:

[1] Aerospace & Law360 (https://www.law360.com/aerospace/news?amp%3Butm_campaign=aerospace&%3Butm_content=2025-08-21&%3Butm_medium=email&%3Butm_source=newsletter&nl_pk=e53fba68-cef1-4d68-8a92-baaf0877d7b6&page=6)

[2] Cybercrime Magazine (https://cybersecurityventures.com/hack-blotter/)

[3] Mitrade (https://www.mitrade.com/insights/news/live-news/article-3-1060055-20250822)