The U.S. Division of Justice will drop a part of one depend of its case in opposition to Twister Money developer Roman Storm as a consequence of a current coverage memo, the company stated Thursday.
The DOJ won’t go to trial on a cost alleging Storm didn’t adjust to cash transmitter enterprise registration guidelines, however nonetheless plans to go to trial in July over allegations he knowingly transmitted funds tied to crimes, conspired to commit cash laundering and conspired to violate sanctions legislation, the DOJ stated in a letter filed to the decide overseeing its case.
“The Government writes to update the Court regarding this case, which is scheduled for trial on July 14, 2025,” the letter stated. “After review of this case, this Office and the Office of the Deputy Attorney General have determined that this prosecution is consistent with the letter and spirit of the April 7, 2025 Memorandum from the Deputy Attorney General.”
The April 7 memo, authored by Deputy Legal professional Normal Todd Blanche, directed prosecutors to not pursue circumstances the place rules could also be unclear, or didn’t meet sure standards, particularly saying the DOJ ought to finish “regulation by prosecution.” Prosecutors in one other case in opposition to the builders of crypto mixer Samourai Pockets have already requested a decide overseeing that case to pause it whereas they think about the memo.
In a press release, Brian Klein of Waymaker LLP instructed CoinDesk that his agency, which represents Storm, believes “that this case should never have been brought.”
“Its dismissal would be consistent with the policies of the Trump Administration and the principles outlined by the Department of Justice in its recent cryptocurrency guidance memo,” he stated. “Roman’s prosecution is a threat to the entire crypto industry and the interests of justice will be best served by its swift dismissal. We will not cease to fight for Roman and that result.”
Klein spoke at CoinDesk’s Consensus 2025 convention in Toronto on Wednesday, the place he additionally shared his view that the case mustn’t have been introduced.
“One of the defenses we’ve raised, which is recognized in the U.S., is that coding — literally typing out code — you are given free speech protections for coding,” he stated. “It’s just as if you wrote a book or you did some other type of expressive activity.”
