A fresh Senate debate over the CLARITY Act has shifted toward ethics rules, stablecoin rewards, and whether crypto legislation should place special limits on President Donald Trump’s digital asset activity.
Cynthia Lummis Rejects Trump-Specific Crypto Rules
Senator Cynthia Lummis said lawmakers are still working on ethics language that both Congress and the White House can accept. She argued that the CLARITY Act should create rules that apply across administrations, rather than targeting one elected official.
Lummis said Congress must consider what elected officials can do before, during, and after public service. She added that private citizens should not lose the right to earn money from their work after entering office. In her view, the bill must strike a “decent balance and something fair.”
The senator also pushed back against the idea of state attorneys general suing federal elected officials over digital asset matters. Asked whether such lawsuits should be allowed, Lummis replied, “absolutely not.” She said that approach would be “patently unfair” if aimed at officials from the same state or another state.
Lummis also said “blind trusts are certainly on the table” as lawmakers discuss ethics safeguards. However, she warned against writing rules around one person, saying Congress “can’t just legislate for one person.”
Trump Crypto Limits Raise Veto Questions
The debate has intensified because Democrats want stronger ethics rules tied to President Trump’s cryptocurrency activity. Senator Elizabeth Warren has urged colleagues to add tougher language before a potential vote on the broader market structure bill.
During the interview, Lummis was asked whether Trump would veto the CLARITY Act if the bill placed limits on his crypto ventures. She responded, “if it’s targeted towards him, I don’t blame him.” She added that the bill should be written to “withstand the test of time.”
Lummis said the legislation should apply regardless of who occupies the White House or serves in Congress. She framed the issue as a broader question of disclosure and fairness, rather than a dispute focused only on Trump amid his emphasis on the bill passing.
The senator also compared the crypto debate with stock trading by members of Congress. She referenced Nancy Pelosi as an example of lawmakers making money while in office and said Congress must be fair when setting standards for elected officials.
Stablecoin Yield Debate Returns to CLARITY Act
Stablecoin reward rules have also returned as a central issue in CLARITY Act talks. Senator Thom Tillis has suggested adding “circuit-breaker” language to address concerns that stablecoin yields could pull deposits away from banks.
The proposed language would allow bank regulators, including the FDIC and OCC, to intervene if they see systemwide deposit flight into crypto. Banking groups have argued that the current draft remains too vague and may leave loopholes for stablecoin issuers or related firms.
Source: Punchbowl
Tillis and Senator Angela Alsobrooks had helped negotiate a compromise between banks and crypto firms. That approach would allow crypto companies to offer activity-based rewards, but banking associations continue to seek stronger protections.
Lummis said lawmakers expect to release new CLARITY Act text in the coming days. She said the bill is aimed at helping law enforcement fight illicit finance, adding consumer protections, and keeping digital asset markets in the United States.
