The DOJ wants to retry Tornado Cash co-founder Roman Storm on money laundering and sanctions counts. Here’s what happened and what’s next.
The legal battle over Tornado Cash is far from finished. The Department of Justice has formally asked a federal judge to schedule a retrial for Roman Storm, co-founder of the crypto mixing protocol.
Prosecutors want to retry Storm on two counts: money laundering and sanctions violations. A jury deadlocked on both during the first trial. The DOJ filed the request with Judge Katherine Polk Failla of the Southern District of New York on March 9, 2026.
🚨NEW: The DOJ has asked to retry @TornadoCash co-founder @rstormsf on the two counts the jury hung on in the first trial: money laundering and sanctions violations.
Prosecutors proposed an early October retrial date, even as Storm’s Rule 29 motion to overturn his conviction on… https://t.co/0zX4hemook
— Eleanor Terrett (@EleanorTerrett) March 10, 2026
DOJ Pushes for an October Retrial Date
In a letter to Judge Failla, the government said it expects the retrial to last about three weeks. Prosecutors proposed starting the new trial on or around October 5 or 12, 2026.
The defense team confirmed it would be available in late September or early October, and also in early December.
The government acknowledged that Storm’s Rule 29 motion to overturn his conviction on a separate count is still pending. That motion is scheduled for argument on April 9.
Even so, prosecutors argued that waiting to set a trial date could create scheduling conflicts down the line. They urged the court to lock in a date now to avoid further delays.
Storm was found guilty on one count during the August 2025 trial. That count involved operating an unlicensed money transmitting business.
His Rule 29 motion seeks to have that conviction thrown out. The two hung counts, money laundering and sanctions violations, each carry sentences that together could reach up to 40 years in federal prison.
Roman Storm Speaks Out on the Fight Ahead
Storm responded publicly after the DOJ filing, sharing his reaction on X.
Today, the SDNY prosecutors filed a letter to Judge Failla requesting a retrial date. They want to go again in October. The prosecutors want to retry me on 2 counts the jury couldn't unanimously decide on. A jury of 12 Americans heard 4 weeks of evidence and deadlocked: no… pic.twitter.com/ZG5pGy4Mer
— Roman Storm 🇺🇸 🌪️ (@rstormsf) March 10, 2026
He said prosecutors want to retry him for writing open-source code, for a protocol he says he does not control, and for transactions he says he never personally handled.
He pointed out that a jury of 12 people heard four weeks of evidence and still could not agree that his actions were criminal.
Storm also noted several shifts in the broader political and regulatory landscape. He referenced a memo from the Deputy Attorney General stating that the DOJ is not a digital assets regulator and will not target mixers for the acts of end users.
He pointed to the Treasury Department lifting Tornado Cash sanctions entirely. He also cited a March 2026 Treasury report to Congress under the GENIUS Act, which stated that lawful digital asset users may use mixers to enable financial privacy.
Despite all that, Storm said, the SDNY prosecutors are pushing forward. He described the situation as a contradiction within the same government. He added that he has a daughter and a life in Seattle, and that he will continue fighting.
Read also: NGP Protocol Hacked: $2M Stolen, Tornado Cash Used
Legal Defense Funds Running Low as Retrial Looms
Storm was candid about his financial situation. He said he has basically exhausted his legal defense funds after the first trial.
Facing another full federal trial, he said every dollar raised goes directly toward attorneys, expert witnesses, and the broader defense effort required to take on SDNY prosecutors.
He framed the case as larger than his own circumstances. For those who care about financial privacy or who write code and see it as a form of speech, Storm said this is the moment that matters.
He warned that without adequate funding, the government wins by default.
Hence, the outcome of this case could influence how courts treat open-source software developers in future cases involving blockchain protocols and privacy tools.
