DOJ Confirms 'Code Is Not a Crime' (3 minute read)
The DOJ announces it will no longer prosecute blockchain developers for crimes committed by users of their software, reversing the enforcement stance that led to the Tornado Cash prosecutions, though legal ambiguity remains.
What: Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche announced at a Bitcoin conference that the Department of Justice will stop investigating or charging blockchain developers for illegal activity conducted by third parties using their platforms, provided developers had no knowing involvement in those crimes.
Why it matters: This represents a major policy reversal from the enforcement approach that led to the conviction of Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm in August 2025, signaling a significant shift in how crypto developers might be treated under US law. However, the undefined "knowingly helping" standard leaves developers uncertain about where legal protection ends.
Takeaway: Crypto developers should understand that while the DOJ's stance has softened, the legal boundaries of what constitutes "knowing involvement" remain unclear, and seeking pre-enforcement clarity through courts may not be viable based on recent case dismissals.
Deep dive
- The DOJ announced it will no longer prosecute blockchain developers solely for crimes committed by third-party users of their software, marking a fundamental shift in enforcement policy
- Acting AG Todd Blanche stated that developers who aren't the third-party users and aren't "knowingly helping" criminals won't be investigated or charged
- This policy directly reverses the approach that led to the prosecution of Tornado Cash developers Roman Storm (convicted August 2025) and Roman Semenov (indicted August 2023)
- Tornado Cash, a crypto mixer used for money laundering and sanctions evasion, was sanctioned by OFAC in August 2022 before sanctions were lifted in November 2024
- The announcement follows an April 2025 DOJ memo outlining commitment to "ending regulation by prosecution" of developers
- Coin Center's Peter Van Valkenburgh cautiously welcomed the message but highlighted critical ambiguity about what constitutes "helping" or "knowing" about bad users
- A recent case involving developer Michael Lewellen, who sued for pre-enforcement clarity on his Ethereum crowdfunding tool, was dismissed in late March
- The dismissal creates a paradox: DOJ tells courts there's no credible threat to developers while developers remain fearful, and DOJ fights against requests for legal clarity
- Legal observers note the "knowingly helping" standard remains undefined, leaving significant uncertainty about prosecutorial discretion boundaries
- The policy shift represents the Trump administration's approach to crypto enforcement, with Blanche stating he doesn't want the DOJ to be seen as "causing problems" for platforms
Decoder
- Tornado Cash: A cryptocurrency mixer and privacy protocol that obscures transaction trails by pooling funds from multiple users before redistributing them
- OFAC: Office of Foreign Assets Control, a US Treasury department that administers and enforces economic sanctions
- Crypto mixer: Software that combines cryptocurrency from multiple sources to obscure the origin and destination of transactions
- Noncustodial software: Cryptocurrency applications where users maintain control of their private keys and funds, rather than the platform holding custody
- Money transmission: The business of transferring funds, which requires licenses and regulatory compliance in the US
- Pre-enforcement clarity: Legal guidance sought before taking action to determine if that action would violate laws
Original article
The DOJ will no longer investigate or charge blockchain developers for crimes committed by third parties using their software, provided the developer had no knowing involvement in those crimes. The new policy directly reverses the enforcement posture that produced Roman Storm's conviction in August 2025 and Roman Semenov's 2023 indictment over Tornado Cash. Crypto legal observers flag that the "knowingly helping" standard remains undefined, leaving open questions about where prosecutorial discretion ends and protected open-source development begins.