A sweeping cryptocurrency bill that appeared trapped by President Donald Trump’s own digital-asset interests has a new path forward—but only if a fragile Senate coalition holds together Tuesday.
Trump has agreed to a significant portion of a bipartisan ethics proposal sought by Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Democratic Sen. Ruben Gallego of Arizona, according to three Republican authors of the CLARITY Act. The revised language would give state attorneys general an enforcement role and require certain large financial interests in crypto issuers to be divested or placed in a blind trust.
That is a major shift in the negotiations. It is not a guarantee that the bill will pass.
What Trump reportedly accepted
An earlier version of the legislation would have barred federally elected officials, their spouses and federal judges from issuing digital assets. Several Democrats and Tillis argued that those restrictions did not adequately address conflicts involving existing crypto wealth or guarantee independent enforcement.
The tougher Tillis-Gallego proposal sought two central changes: allowing state attorneys general to enforce the ethics rules alongside the Justice Department, and requiring an official to divest or use a blind trust when a financial interest in a crypto-issuing entity crosses a significant threshold.
The Associated Press reported Monday that a senior Republican aide described Trump as accepting “about 80%” of that proposal. Republican Sens. Cynthia Lummis, Tim Scott and John Boozman said the agreement provides a meaningful enforcement role for state attorneys general.
The revised language would also let state attorneys general sue a cryptocurrency exchange for listing a digital asset prohibited by the bill, according to the AP.
Why the ethics language became decisive
Trump’s family has extensive business interests in cryptocurrency, including World Liberty Financial and meme coins bearing the president’s name and image. AP reported that Trump disclosed more than $1.4 billion from crypto businesses last year, making conflict-of-interest language a central obstacle rather than a side debate.
The White House has said Trump does not participate in family business decisions managed by his sons. Critics have argued that leaving enforcement solely to a Justice Department led by his appointees would be inadequate.
That disagreement made state-level enforcement a red line for several potential swing votes. Maryland Democratic Sen. Angela Alsobrooks told AP that she would not support legislation without ethics rules and wanted state attorneys general able to act if the Justice Department declined.
The new text addresses that demand, but Tillis and Gallego had not publicly endorsed the compromise by early Monday. That silence matters because the bill needs support beyond the Republican conference.
Tuesday’s vote needs 60 senators
The Senate is expected to hold a procedural vote Tuesday, September 15. Republicans hold 53 seats, so even unanimous Republican support would still require at least seven Democrats or independents to reach the 60-vote threshold needed to advance debate.
Reuters reported that the vote could determine the bill’s fate as Congress approaches the midterm campaign period. The measure would attempt to settle a long-running jurisdictional dispute by defining when digital assets fall under securities rules and when they should be treated as commodities.
Republican supporters say clearer lines between the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission would protect consumers while keeping crypto companies in the United States. A Senate Banking Committee majority summary also emphasizes disclosure, anti-fraud and anti-money-laundering requirements.
Democratic critics remain skeptical. A July analysis from the committee’s Democratic minority argued that previous ethics language contained major loopholes and could not be enforced independently against the president. The latest state-attorney-general provision appears designed to answer one of those objections, but it does not automatically resolve every concern.
A compromise, not a finished law
The immediate development is narrower than either side’s sales pitch. Trump has accepted most—but not all—of a tougher ethics framework, according to Republican negotiators. Senators now have updated legislative language, and the first test arrives Tuesday.
If the motion succeeds, the CLARITY Act would still face debate, amendments, final Senate passage and additional House action before reaching the president’s desk. If it fails, a year of negotiations over rules for the $2.3 trillion digital-asset market could run out of legislative time.
For now, the compromise has moved the bill from stalled to possible. Sixty votes will decide whether “possible” becomes the start of a final push—or the end of this Congress’s crypto fight.
