Tourre's lawyers had fought against any ban on Goldman reimbursing their client, saying it would be unprecedented, even as they said he had every intention of paying any penalty out of his own pocket.
The judge, however, said letting Goldman reimburse Tourre would send the wrong message to others mulling illegal conduct, though the defendant could seek reimbursement from others.
"To permit Tourre to obtain reimbursement from Goldman, which the jury in this case found to be a co-violator of the securities laws, would undermine the purposes of the civil penalty statutes - to punish the individual violator and to deter future violations," she wrote.
Goldman did pay Tourre's legal fees, and has said it had no agreement with Tourre to reimburse him for penalties.
A spokesman for the bank declined to comment on Wednesday.
Forrest also denied an SEC request for an injunction barring Tourre from future securities law violations, saying there was no evidence he planned to return to the industry after finishing his studies in June 2016. But she said the SEC could reapply if he returns in the next three years.
(Read More: SEC should target individuals, not companies: Fmr. SEC Head)
The judge's decision drew mixed reactions.
"This really sends a loud and clear message that this court is not going to tolerate this conduct," said David Marder, a partner at Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi and a former SEC lawyer.
But Dennis Kelleher, chief executive of the non-profit organization Better Markets, said a big fine cannot hide the government's "indefensible" failure to have brought criminal charges against senior Wall Street executives over the financial crisis.
"Wall Street recklessness, fraud and criminality were at the core of the crash and crisis," he said. "History will judge prosecutors and regulators harshly for abdicating their duty to enforce the law without fear or favor on Wall Street as they do on Main Street."
The case is SEC v. Tourre, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 10-03229.