According to @EleanorTerrett, Acting Assistant Attorney General Matt Galeotti of the DOJ Criminal Division stated in Jackson Hole that going forward, consistent with principles of notice and fairness, where evidence shows software is truly decentralized, enforcement considerations will address that decentralization status (partial remark shared), source: @EleanorTerrett on X, Aug 21, 2025. These DOJ remarks center on the criterion of being truly decentralized, a regulatory focal point that traders track when assessing relative legal risk across DeFi protocols versus centralized platforms, source: @EleanorTerrett on X, Aug 21, 2025.

According to @iampaulgrewal, where software is truly decentralized, solely automates peer-to-peer transactions, and no third party has custody or control over user assets, new 18 U.S.C. 1960(b)(1)(C) charges against the third party will not be approved (source: @iampaulgrewal). According to @iampaulgrewal, this delineation indicates that enforcement under 1960(b)(1)(C) targets non-decentralized or custodial arrangements, a key factor for traders evaluating DeFi regulatory risk (source: @iampaulgrewal). According to @iampaulgrewal, traders can prioritize legal-risk screening for protocols that meet decentralized and non-custodial criteria when assessing headline and enforcement exposure tied to unlicensed money transmitting allegations (source: @iampaulgrewal).