Senators Lummis and Wyden Oppose DOJ’s Stance on Tornado Cash Charges
United States Senators Cynthia Lummis and Ron Wyden recently expressed their concerns to Attorney General Merrick Garland regarding the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) interpretation of money transmission licensing. They specifically referenced the case against Roman Storm, the co-founder of crypto mixer Tornado Cash, who has been accused of operating an unlicensed money transmission operation and other serious crimes. The senators believe that the DOJ’s interpretation contradicts the definition of money transmission established by the Bank Secrecy Act and the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).
According to Lummis and Wyden, money transmission is defined as the acceptance and transmission of currency and other forms of value under the Bank Secrecy Act and FinCEN’s guidelines. They argue that non-custodial crypto service providers, like Tornado Cash, do not fit this definition and should not be treated as money transmitters. The senators believe that the DOJ’s actions are at odds with the Treasury’s position, leading to confusion and inconsistent policy enforcement.
Lummis and Wyden argue that bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies have clear and identifiable owners throughout the entire transaction process. They contend that there is no uncertainty about where ownership resides, and therefore, custody and control should be the determining factor for establishing the occurrence of “acceptance and transmission” on crypto networks. In essence, they believe that the DOJ’s approach fails to account for the unique nature of cryptocurrencies.
The senators also highlight FinCEN’s role as the primary authority concerning money transmission registration requirements. They caution that the DOJ’s proposed standard could potentially be applied to a wide range of services, including internet service providers and even the post office, which process bank transfers. This broad application of the DOJ’s interpretation raises concerns about overreach and the potential imposition of unnecessary regulatory requirements.
In April, several crypto advocacy groups supported these concerns by filing a joint amicus brief with the Southern New York District Court. The brief echoed the senators’ argument that non-custodial crypto service providers should not be considered money transmitters under the prevailing definition. These groups aim to challenge the DOJ’s interpretation and its potential implications for the broader crypto industry.
Roman Storm’s lawyers also filed a motion in March to dismiss the charges against him, asserting that Tornado Cash does not meet the criteria of a money transmission business and that Storm cannot prevent sanctioned groups from using the service due to its immutable nature. Prosecutors maintain that Storm should be held accountable for operating the service and allege that he designed software to facilitate criminal activities. They argue that Tornado Cash was involved in the transportation and transmission of funds derived from criminal offenses.
Storm was arrested in August on charges related to sanctions violations, facilitating money laundering, and unlicensed money transmission. If convicted, he could face a maximum sentence of 45 years in prison. Notably, Storm has pleaded not guilty to the charges and is currently out on $2 million bail but with travel restrictions imposed.
The concerns raised by Senators Lummis and Wyden shed light on the ongoing debate over the definition and regulation of money transmission in the context of cryptocurrencies. Their letter to Attorney General Garland seeks to address the seemingly conflicting interpretations between the DOJ and Treasury Department, emphasizing the need for clarity and consistent policy enforcement in this rapidly evolving sector.
23 thoughts on “Senators Lummis and Wyden Oppose DOJ’s Stance on Tornado Cash Charges”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This article just shows that politicians are out of touch with the reality of cryptocurrencies.
I’m glad to see that Roman Storm pleaded not guilty and is fighting against the charges. It’s essential for the justice system to thoroughly examine the accusations and make sure the appropriate decision is reached. 🙏🏼
Wow, it’s great to see Senators Lummis and Wyden stepping up to address the concerns regarding the DOJ’s interpretation of money transmission licensing! This is an important issue for the crypto industry.
I’m glad the DOJ is taking a strong stance against illegal activities in the crypto industry. These senators should stay out of it.
The joint amicus brief filed by crypto advocacy groups is a powerful move in challenging the DOJ’s interpretation. Let’s hope it leads to a clearer definition and regulation of money transmission for the crypto industry.
Who cares about the senators’ concerns? They clearly have no understanding of how cryptocurrencies work. 🤦♂️
This article highlights the ongoing debate over the definition and regulation of money transmission in cryptocurrencies. It’s a complex issue, but it’s crucial to find the right balance to foster innovation while addressing potential risks.
The DOJ’s interpretation is in line with the need to combat money laundering and other financial crimes. The senators need to stop trying to protect those involved in illegal activities.
I totally agree with the senators that the DOJ’s interpretation seems to contradict the definition of money transmission established by the Bank Secrecy Act and FinCEN. It’s crucial to have consistent policy enforcement.
I fully support the DOJ’s interpretation and their efforts to crack down on illegal activities in the crypto space. The senators should stay out of it.
Roman Storm’s defense team has a strong argument that Tornado Cash does not meet the criteria of a money transmission business. This case will have important implications for the future of crypto regulations.
Thank you Senators Lummis and Wyden for advocating for non-custodial crypto service providers like Tornado Cash. They don’t fit the definition of money transmitters, and their unique nature should be considered.
Senators Lummis and Wyden are absolutely right in emphasizing the need for clarity and consistent policy enforcement in the rapidly evolving crypto sector. Let’s hope their letter to Attorney General Garland leads to a resolution.
The senators’ arguments are weak and misguided. They should focus on protecting the public, not criminals.
The senators made a strong point that bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies have clear owners throughout the transaction process. Ownership should be the determining factor when it comes to acceptance and transmission on crypto networks.
It’s alarming to see senators advocating for leniency towards someone accused of serious crimes. This sends the wrong message to the public.
The DOJ’s interpretation is absolutely valid. They are cracking down on illegal activities in the crypto space, and that’s a good thing.
It’s alarming to think that the DOJ’s proposed standard could potentially be applied to internet service providers and even the post office! 😱 We definitely don’t want unnecessary regulatory requirements imposed on such services.
It seems like the senators are advocating for criminals in the name of “clarity.” Ridiculous! 😤
Non-custodial crypto service providers should absolutely be subject to money transmission regulations. The senators are just trying to create loopholes.
This just shows that the senators are trying to undermine law enforcement efforts. It’s disappointing. 😡
It’s clear that the senators are just trying to undermine law enforcement efforts. They should focus on more important issues.
It’s clear that non-custodial crypto service providers should be subject to money transmission regulations. The senators are just trying to protect their own interests.