Federal prosecutors have asked a Manhattan federal judge to reject Roman Storm's bid to move his money-laundering and money-transmission conspiracy trial out of New York. Storm, who helped create the privacy-focused cryptocurrency mixer Tornado Cash, faces two counts that carry a combined maximum sentence of ten years. His lawyers argue the case belongs in a different venue, but the government says the alleged conduct — processing deposits for a customer in Manhattan — justifies keeping the matter there. The filing came on the same day the Treasury Department announced it would pull back a proposed rule that would have required mixers to collect and report user data. The agency cited concerns that the rule could chill legitimate financial privacy activity and place unnecessary burdens on service providers. While the policy shift signals a more measured approach to crypto regulation, it does not dismiss the charges against Storm. He was convicted in August 2025 on a separate money-transmission conspiracy count and is scheduled to face a retrial in April 2027 after a court delayed proceedings to consider his pending acquittal motion. Prosecutors have pointed to a recent appellate decision involving Bitcoin Fog, another mixer, as precedent for maintaining venue in Manhattan. They argue that a customer who deposited funds into Tornado Cash helped expand the pool of anonymous transactions, even though the money remained in the system only briefly. The case hinges on whether building and maintaining a tool that enables anonymity constitutes criminal conduct when the operator knows it is used for illicit purposes. Meanwhile, the Justice Department has issued guidance urging prosecutors to avoid charging mixer operators for merely facilitating transactions unless there is evidence of intent to launder criminal proceeds. That policy does not retroactively protect Storm, who continues to contest the government's theory of accountability for developers who create privacy tools. The broader debate reflects tension between law enforcement's focus on financial crime and efforts to preserve digital privacy in decentralized systems. As courts weigh these questions, the outcome could shape how future developers design and deploy anonymizing technologies without running afoul of federal law.