Ethereum’s Tornado Cash Case: Judge Rules Code Isn’t Protected Speech Under First Amendment

• In recent news, a U.S. District Judge ruled against Ethereum mixer Tornado Cash in a notable legal case.
• This ruling follows the arrest of Tornado Cash’s co-founder on money laundering charges over a year ago.
• Judge Failla dismissed the motion to drop the charges by developer Roman Storm, marking a significant legal precedent.

A U.S. District Judge determined that computer code does not qualify as protected speech under the First Amendment in the high-profile Tornado Cash case.

Judge Rules Against Tornado Cash Developer

Last week, Judge Katherine Polk Failla rejected the motion filed by Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm to dismiss the charges against him. Storm argued that the computer code developed for the Ethereum mixer should be considered protected speech under the First Amendment. Despite these arguments, Judge Failla allowed the case to proceed, setting an important precedent in the intersection of technology and law.

Government’s Stance on Tornado Cash Sanctions

The U.S. government sanctioned Tornado Cash in August 2022, citing its use by state-sponsored hackers to launder money. Privacy advocates, such as Edward Snowden, criticized these sanctions, saying they were authoritarian and a threat to freedom. However, the legal case highlights a critical balance between maintaining financial security and protecting privacy rights.

Legal Arguments and Industry Reactions

Roman Storm claimed his First Amendment rights were infringed upon by the charges, arguing that computer code is a form of protected speech. This legal stance is reminiscent of previous clashes between programmers and government regulations. Industry experts, including former Southern District of New York Assistant U.S. Attorney David Miller, noted that such motions to dismiss based on First Amendment grounds are rarely successful.

The Functional versus Expressive Nature of Code

Judge Failla emphasized the functional nature of the Tornado Cash code, distinguishing it from expressive speech. She noted that while code can convey ideas, its utilitarian purpose does not warrant First Amendment protection in this context. Miller compared this argument to unsuccessful defenses in cases involving material support for terrorism, where the intent to facilitate criminal activities nullifies any speech protection claims.

Broader Implications for Software Development

This case prompted a broader discussion within the tech community about the criminalization of software development. Advocates argue that writing privacy-focused code should not be considered a crime. This sentiment has galvanized support for Storm, with substantial funds raised for his legal defense. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin and other prominent figures have voiced their support.

The Road Ahead for Roman Storm

Looking forward, the case against Roman Storm continues to draw significant attention. Despite Judge Failla’s skepticism towards Storm’s argument, his legal team might still attempt to present First Amendment defenses during the trial scheduled for early December. The outcome could set a critical precedent for future cases involving technology and free speech.

Conclusion

The Tornado Cash case underscores the ongoing conflict between technological innovation and regulatory frameworks. Judge Failla’s ruling that computer code does not receive First Amendment protection has far-reaching implications for software developers. As the trial progresses, it will be vital to observe how these legal debates shape the future landscape of privacy and cybersecurity in the crypto space.