Federal Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby dismissed attorney Tom Goldstein's motion to exclude his 2018 statement of carrying $968,000 in cash upon entry, allowing the prosecution to use the evidence in trial. Goldstein, co-founder of SCOTUSblog, is charged with failing to declare millions in gambling earnings and suspected tax crimes. He claimed his Fifth Amendment rights were violated when questioned at Washington Dulles International Airport about a luggage bag containing $968,000, but the judge ruled that he was not detained at the time, thus no Miranda warning was required. The judge also dismissed his motion to dismiss several charges on the basis of statute of limitations. The trial is scheduled for January 13, 2026, in the Federal Court of Maryland, and Goldstein has pleaded not guilty to all 22 charges.
Case Background and Defendant
Tom Goldstein, co-founder of SCOTUSblog and a veteran Supreme Court defense attorney, currently faces multiple federal charges. The case involves statements he made to customs in 2018 when he entered the U.S. from Hong Kong carrying $968,000 in cash.
Initially, Goldstein told Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officials that the cash was poker tournament winnings, later changing his statement to the IRS that it was a personal loan.
Judge's Ruling and Legal Reasoning
Federal Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby on October 7th dismissed Goldstein's motion to exclude his cash statement. The judge found that evidence showed Goldstein was "not detained" during the customs screening process on October 25, 2018, thus Miranda warnings were not applicable.
The judge also dismissed his motion to dismiss several charges based on statute of limitations, indicating that statute limitations are grounds for trial defense, not for pre-trial dismissal.
Nature of Funds and Points of Controversy
The prosecution accuses Goldstein of transporting $968,000 in cash from Hong Kong to Washington D.C., and initially claiming at the airport that the money was from a global high-stakes poker game. However, Goldstein later told the IRS that the money was actually a personal loan, not gambling proceeds.
This disputed amount is part of a broader investigation, accusing him of failing to declare millions in gambling earnings.
Charges and Scope of Investigation
The federal grand jury indictment includes 22 charges, accusing Goldstein of failing to declare gambling earnings, providing false statements to lending institutions, and allegedly using his company, Goldstein & Russell, to cover personal debts and losses.
The investigation estimates his earnings from poker games over the years could be as high as $50 million, accusing him of misusing company accounts to repay personal debts.
Litigation Process and Delays
The prosecution has been delayed multiple times due to Goldstein's "hundreds of days" of travel outside the U.S., with several stays of prosecution issued. His travels included participating in high-stakes gambling games and loan negotiations.
The judge noted that whether these absences cause a suspension of the statute of limitations will ultimately be decided by the jury.
Latest Charges and Defendant's Response
A Maryland grand jury issued a superseding indictment two months ago with new details, accusing Goldstein of attempting to influence a company manager not to cooperate with the IRS by offering a $10,000 bonus and using cryptocurrency to repay student loans.
Goldstein has pleaded not guilty to all charges and filed a motion to dismiss this new charge.
Trial Arrangements and Evidence Use
The trial is set for January 13, 2026, at the Southern District Federal Court of Maryland. The prosecution plans to use Goldstein's own statements about the cash from 2018 as evidence in the case.
The judge's ruling ensures these controversial statements can be presented during the trial, becoming a key part of the case.
Legal Disputes and Rights Claims
Goldstein claims his Fifth Amendment rights were violated during the customs questioning process, as he did not receive a Miranda warning. However, the judge dismissed this argument based on the determination that he was "not detained."
The dispute over statute limitations will be an active defense in the trial, rather than a pre-trial issue to resolve.
Case Impact and Industry Attention
The case has attracted attention from the legal and gambling industries due to the involvement of high poker winnings, alleged tax evasion, and complex financial operations. Goldstein's status as a prominent attorney also increases the public interest in the case.
The trial outcome may set precedents for cross-border cash declarations and tax handling of gambling earnings.
Subsequent Procedures and Timing
The case is scheduled to proceed to trial, with Goldstein's defense team needing to present defenses such as statute limitations during the trial. The prosecution will continue to prepare evidence materials, including cash statements.
The entire legal process is expected to take a long time, depending on the progress of the trial and potential appeals.
