DOJ to Stop Charging Crypto Developers Without Evidence of Criminal Intent

Highlights:

• The DOJ is set to stop charging crypto developers unless there is proof of intent.
• The assistant attorney general said writing code is not a crime, and prosecutors will only pursue cases with deliberate illegal activity.
• Crypto advocates welcomed clarity, while watchdog groups warned decentralized tools could still aid criminal activity.

The U.S. Justice Department announced a major change in how it handles developers of decentralized platforms. Officials stated that developers will not face charges unless prosecutors find clear evidence of criminal intent. Acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew Galeotti addressed the issue at a digital assets summit in Wyoming.

The US DOJ will not pursue legal action against decentralized platform developers without criminal intent, marking a notable shift in policy. Crypto advocates view this as a positive step toward clearer regulations. #Crypto #DOJ pic.twitter.com/QOtYc01p75

— Vincent Bu Lu (@VincentBuLu1) August 22, 2025

He explained that writing computer code by itself does not qualify as a crime. Galeotti emphasized that the department will not treat developers as money transmitters unless they knowingly facilitate unlawful activity. “Our view is that merely writing code, without ill-intent, is not a crime,” he said.

The remarks come after a jury in New York convicted Roman Storm, co-founder of Tornado Cash, of conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business. Jurors failed to reach verdicts on money laundering and sanctions charges, which highlighted the complexity of applying traditional financial laws to decentralized platforms. The conviction fueled debate across the crypto sector, with critics arguing that Storm only published open-source code while prosecutors claimed the service allowed illicit finance.

Galeotti clarified that the department will apply this new approach moving forward. Earlier cases, including the Tornado Cash prosecution, remain unaffected. This statement created immediate questions about how new rules will shape future enforcement in the industry.

What About Tornado Cash?

Galeotti’s announcement directly impacts the use of U.S. code 1960(b)(1)(C), which prohibits unlicensed money transmitting businesses from moving funds tied to unlawful activity. He assured that federal prosecutors will not use this statute to charge new cases against developers building decentralized tools without possession of user assets.

This change is unlike in the earlier years when the prosecutors attempted to use the same criteria applicable to the traditional payment providers. Organizations such as PayPal and Cash App are required to register as money transmitters, run checks on their customers, and report suspicious activity. Decentralized platforms claim that they cannot do this due to the lack of control over separate transactions.

The Tornado Cash case was an example of this conflict. The platform allowed users to conceal blockchain traces, which made the transactions harder to detect. According to the prosecutors, these tools facilitate money laundering. Critics argued that Storm was unfairly punished for making code. The trail revealed the conflict between the enforcement of finance and open-source development.

Galeotti made clear that the new approach does not erase past convictions. However, his statement signaled that prosecutors will not treat future developers in the same way. This clarification sparked questions about whether Storm’s case would have reached the same outcome under current guidance.

Prosecutors Emphasize Intent in Future Cases

Galeotti explained that future prosecutions will focus on intent rather than technical classification. Developers who have no criminal intentions should not anticipate any charges based on money transmission laws. According to Galeotti, those who knowingly misuse technology will face charges, while developers acting responsibly will not.

Crypto supporters, such as Jennifer Rosenthal, hailed the clarification, which they said would provide long-needed certainty to open-source code writers. They claimed that innovation had been subdued by fear of prosecution. Nevertheless, anti-money laundering organizations criticized that decentralized instruments may still serve as a mask to criminal webs.

"The fact that the DOJ acknowledged that software developers should not be held responsible for third parties' misuse of their code affirms what we have been advocating for years," said @amandatums @fund_defi. "Let's celebrate this as a moment of progress and remember that there…

— Jennifer Rosenthal (@jenn_rosenthal) August 21, 2025