18 State Attorneys General Urge Senate to Reject Clarity Act Over Scam Concerns
State Attorneys General Call for Senate to Reject Clarity Act
A bipartisan group of 18 state attorneys general has sent a letter to the U.S. Senate urging lawmakers to vote against the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act without changes. The officials are concerned that the bill could restrict their ability to bring lawsuits against online scams related to cryptocurrencies.
Key Points from the Coalition's Letter
- The letter was signed by 18 attorneys general from states including New York, Arizona, Connecticut, and California, representing both parties.
- The signers argue that the Clarity Act's language is ambiguous and could allow defendants to block state enforcement actions.
- They cite FBI data showing that $11.4 billion was stolen from investors through crypto scams last year.
What the AGs' Letter States
The letter emphasizes that states must retain their police powers to protect Americans from predatory scammers. It specifically points out that the Clarity Act would let the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) preempt state authority through the "qualified transaction" definition, which could undermine state efforts to oversee securities and commodities markets.
Other Opposition and Responses
Additional concerns have come from the Indian Gaming Association, which opposes the bill due to what it sees as a major expansion of Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) authority, potentially threatening tribal sovereignty. Senator Cynthia Lummis, a chief sponsor of the bill, responded that she had met with the association's chair in June and did not hear opposition at that time.
Furthermore, the Independent Bankers Association of Texas criticized revised text on stablecoin yield as insufficient.
Confirmed Facts from the Sources
- The letter from the state attorneys general was published on September 13, 2026.
- The FBI reported that $11.4 billion was stolen via crypto in the previous year.
- The Clarity Act includes provisions that could allow the SEC to preempt state laws.
Uncertainties in the Bill's Application
The exact impact of the Clarity Act's language on state enforcement remains unclear. The letter describes the language as "ambiguous" and vague, which could lead to legal challenges that prevent states from acting against scams.
Why This Matters for Crypto Regulation
This opposition highlights the tension between federal and state authority in regulating digital assets. If the bill passes without changes, it could limit the tools available to state officials for combating fraud, potentially affecting consumer protection in the crypto space.