The DOJ’s acting criminal division, referred to the Roman storm incident obliquely in his speech, claiming that the department would not invoke similar accusations against software developers.
The incident attracted a lot of sympathy, even within the federal government, and perhaps encouraged this new stance. Still, he did not deal with the Storm case directly.
Is DOJ changing its attitude towards tornado cash and storms?
At this point, there is much attention on Wyoming’s Jackson Hole as Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is expected to speak there tomorrow.
Today, Matt Galeotti, deputy assistant to the criminal division of DOJ, gave a speech that resonated with his followers of the Roman Storm Incident.
“If evidence indicates that the software is truly decentralized and automates only peer-to-peer transactions, and if a third party does not custody and manage the user assets, the new 1960(b)(1)(c) claim will not be approved,” Galeotti argues.
So, what does this mean? Earlier this month, DOJ signed a lawsuit against Roman Storm, the founder of Tornado Cash.
He was also not guilty of another charge, with the ju judge being hung by a third. In any case, 1960(b)(1)(c) was a specific accusation that the prosecutor successfully nailed the storm.
As the trial progresses, crypto privacy experts gather behind the Storm, with influential federal financial regulators appearing to support his position. In other words, Galeotti’s speech obliquely admitted that the DOJ would not pursue accusations like the Roman storm incident in the future.
Privacy fans are pleased, but the questions remain
Reporters on the field explained their strong response to the speech. The crowd gave standing ovations, torn long-term industry veterans apart. Citations such as “Wealthy innovators don’t need to be afraid of their freedom” directly targeted the existing procrypted audience.
Still, this is not necessarily a binding promise. Galeotti did not directly mention the Roman storm or the divisional lawsuits against him. That’s a rather serious omission given that this incident happened three weeks ago.
Furthermore, he explicitly stated that the DOJ reserves the right to invoke 1960(b)(1)(c) in the future.
Still, with everything in mind, this is a key moment. DOJ has 12 different lawyers, each managing an office or department. Galeotti therefore has authority over the criminal division to handle federal cases.
In other words, this promise can carry meaningful weight.
A PostDOJ spokesman appears to have rejected accusations of the Roman storm.
