Democratic Senators Chris Murphy, Jeff Merkley and Chris Van Hollen opposed the current version of the CLARITY Act. They called for a ban on the president, members of Congress, senior officials and their families profiting from crypto businesses.
We’re joining @ChrisMurphyCT, @IndivisibleTeam & @ben_mckenzie on Capitol Hill today to discuss the dangers of the CLARITY Act, its failure to rein in Trump’s crypto schemes, and concerns over political corruption and the crypto industry’s influence in DChttps://t.co/SUXVoinSJZ
— AFR (@RealBankReform) July 14, 2026
The lawmakers outlined their position at a July 14 press conference. The event also included representatives of Americans for Financial Reform and Indivisible, as well as actor Ben McKenzie, author of the book “Easy Money” and director of a cryptocurrency documentary.
The senators said the bill establishes a digital asset regulatory framework but does not eliminate conflicts of interest related to U.S. President Donald Trump’s crypto business and his family.
“There’s no point in creating a new regulatory system for cryptocurrencies if it doesn’t stop Trump’s corruption in this industry,” Murphy emphasized.
He said the anti-corruption section should prevent the head of state from influencing rules for an industry in which he has personal financial interests.
Senators demand bans for officials
Merkley proposed adding provisions from the MEME Act or the End Crypto Corruption Act to the CLARITY Act. They would prohibit the president, vice president, cabinet members, senior federal officials, members of Congress and their immediate relatives from owning crypto businesses, promoting digital assets, or profiting from them.
“It’s not enough to draft an amendment or a separate anti-corruption bill. We need to actually stop it,” Merkley said.
Van Hollen proposed similar restrictions during the consideration of the CLARITY Act by the Senate Banking Committee. His proposal would have barred officials and their relatives from owning, promoting, or being affiliated with digital asset issuers and crypto platforms.
Some Democratic amendments were rejected by vote, while others were ruled improperly drafted by Committee Chair Tim Scott and not taken up.
Van Hollen also proposed tougher measures against money laundering, sanctions evasion and terrorist financing via DeFi, expanded disclosures and additional limits on insider trading. These provisions were not included in the version approved by the committee.
“If you’re going to write a digital assets bill, it should protect consumers, limit illegal activity, and eliminate conflicts of interest. The CLARITY Act does not do that,” the senator said.
Supporters of the bill argue it imposes disclosure requirements, preserves authorities’ anti-fraud powers, and sets uniform rules for the industry.
What the CLARITY Act would change
The CLARITY Act would create a federal market structure for digital assets and delineate the authorities of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
According to the Banking Committee version, the SEC would continue to oversee activities involving investment contracts and capital formation. The CFTC would receive primary authority over spot trading in digital commodities.
The document also provides a special disclosure regime for crypto project developers, registration of intermediaries, and joint work by the two regulators.
According to Americans for Financial Reform, consideration of the CLARITY Act is expected next week, starting July 20. The bill will need 60 votes to clear a procedural hurdle.
Earlier, CFTC Chair Michael Selig urged speeding up passage of the bill and warned that regulators would “write all the rules” for the crypto industry themselves if Congress did not move toward a solution. Later, Trump called on the Senate to do the same.
In early July, Senate Banking Committee member Elizabeth Warren urged against bringing the CLARITY Act to a final vote without provisions barring the president from using public office to profit from digital assets.
At the same time, the document was supported by the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives and the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. They believe uniform federal rules will help combat crimes involving digital assets.
The White House rejected the existence of a conflict of interest. Press Secretary Anna Kelly said neither the president nor his family members have allowed or intend to allow a conflict of interest. As Trump told reporters, he does not manage his personal finances, and his assets are managed by trusts.
In July, U.S. banking associations urged the Senate to clarify the CLARITY Act’s provisions on the yield of stablecoins. They argue the current wording leaves room for payments that are economically similar to deposit interest.
