The release of Ross Ulbricht and the lifting of sanctions against Tornado Cash mark defining moments for the crypto community. It is more than symbolic. It is an opportunity to clearly rebrand the United States as a safe place to build the internet of money.
Ross’ freedom comes after over a decade of incarceration — a journey defined by relentless advocacy, legal battles and unwavering support from the crypto community. His release means a lot to me because over a decade ago I launched Silk Road 2.0, his site’s successor.
His double life sentence without parole wasn’t just about the Silk Road, though. It symbolized the US government’s opposition to the blockchain industry and to the idea of a financial system controlled by individuals instead of big banks.
The US dollar is the world reserve currency; and cryptocurrency has given the world democratized access to this reserve via stablecoins. Satoshi Nakamoto announced Bitcoin as a “peer-to-peer electronic cash system,” and the Silk Road was the first to actually execute this vision. Silk Road opened the door to cryptocurrency and introduced Silicon Valley (and many other groups) to bitcoin. It spawned companies like Coinbase, projects like Ethereum, and paved the way for stablecoins, which are not yet private.
Yet there is no legitimate marketplace to buy and sell things with bitcoin. Our industry’s reputation is that we are highly speculative and scam-filled. We cannot forget that Satoshi created bitcoin for payments, not speculation. The US can’t miss out on the internet of money. Under previous administrations, global developers have become nervous about even attending conferences held here. This has implications for the US crypto industry. Ross’ release is a clear signal that the US is no longer a scary place to innovate in cryptocurrency. His experience underscores the need for proportional justice and serves as a reminder of the human cost of over-regulating innovation.
Read more: Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht pardoned by President Trump
His release is an opportunity for reflection—to celebrate his freedom while remaining clear-eyed about the past. Ultimately, his harsh judgment prevented bitcoin innovation for all of us. We must ensure that his case becomes a catalyst for constructive change rather than a footnote in a story of missed opportunities, a series of memecoins, or a divisive narrative that further erodes trust.
Similarly, the case of Tornado Cash founder Roman Storm – who remains in legal jeopardy – clearly shows the dangers of criminalizing innovation. Tornado Cash offers a critical function (a “mixer”) to enable private Ethereum transactions – an essential component of doing business competitively.
Creating privacy technologies is important, but we also need to understand the line between legal and illegal use cases. Yes, start the Silk Road, but don’t allow drug sales on it. Start Tornado Cash, but don’t encourage money laundering on it. The chilling effect both cases have had on developers like me cannot be overstated. Privacy innovators in the U.S. and abroad are now second-guessing their work and fearing legal ramifications for creating tools that protect privacy.
And what do you do when you launch something decentralized that takes on a life of its own? The sanctions against Tornado Cash were deemed illegal by the Fifth Circuit Court, but the Justice Department dismissed the decision as irrelevant. Tornado Cash’s developers were reportedly aware of its misuse for money laundering, but did not act decisively to address it. Should its original developers on a decentralized platform be responsible for users’ activity? There is a clear need for America to define a “Section 230” for developers of decentralized software so that they are not criminally liable for what their users do on their platforms. (“Section 230” refers to a law that exempts social media platforms from liability for content posted on their networks.)
Read more:
As entrepreneur-politician Vivek Ramaswamy said, “You can’t go after the developers of code. What you actually have to do is go after individual bad actors who break the laws that already exist.”
To move forward as an industry, we need to separate the tools from the misuse of those tools. Privacy technologies such as Tornado Cash, Monero and Zcash are unfairly stigmatized due to their potential use for illegal activities. But they hold transformative potential for legitimate use cases, from protecting personal financial data to enabling secure business transactions.
Zcash, with its optional shielded transactions, gives individuals and businesses the ability to conduct secure, private transactions while remaining compliant with anti-money laundering (AML) and know-your-customer (KYC) regulations. Such innovations bridge the gap between cryptocurrency and traditional industries, allowing businesses to adopt crypto without revealing sensitive financial details.
Privacy technology like Zcash also addresses a fundamental flaw in bitcoin and other public finance cryptocurrencies: the exposure of transaction data that creates competitive disadvantages and privacy risks. Soon Zcash will be on Mayachain, allowing a decentralized way to convert between bitcoin and Zcash. It will also soon support ZSAs (secured assets), which will allow stablecoins to be issued privately for the first time.
The new administration has proposed a national “Strategic Bitcoin Reserve,” but this raises questions about privacy and decentralization. Unlike other reserves, such as gold, Bitcoin’s blockchain reveals deposits and withdrawals to the public forever. Is the Trump administration aware of this? This level of transparency is a double-edged sword, making privacy technologies even more essential to maintaining competitive and strategic advantages.
So where do we go from here? Bitcoin and the broader cryptocurrency industry are at a crossroads. This is a moment to focus on the principles that drove early adoption: a perception of privacy, financial freedom and, most importantly, peer-to-peer payments.
The US crypto landscape, currently a mess of regulatory uncertainty, fraud and collapse, needs re-evaluation. Instead of demonizing privacy innovations, policymakers must work with developers to create clear, enforceable standards for the responsible use of “electronic cash.” This means proactive education and cooperation with regulators, more investment in privacy technologies, and development of a regulatory framework that encourages US blockchain innovation.
