Senate Panel Advances CLARITY Crypto Bill After Partisan Vote

The Senate Banking Committee in Washington, D.C., voted Thursday to advance the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, known as CLARITY, after a partisan markup. All 13 Republican committee members and two Democrats, Ruben Gallego and Angela Alsobrooks, voted to move the bill forward; nine Democrats opposed. Lawmakers debated more than 100 amendments before the measure cleared the panel.

The bill outlines which federal agencies — including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission — would have jurisdiction over specific digital asset products and firms. Committee chair Tim Scott framed the measure as aimed at protecting consumers, keeping innovation in the United States, and safeguarding national security. Ranking member Elizabeth Warren criticized the text as drafted by industry and called it ‘written by the crypto industry for the crypto industry,’ accusing Republicans of opening the way to benefit the president’s financial interests.

Senator Cynthia Lummis defended CLARITY as ‘pro law enforcement’ and ‘pro consumer,’ and said the bill would address crypto mixers. Two Democrats broke with their party to support the bill; the remainder of Democrats on the committee voted no.

Amendments covered technical, law enforcement and ethics issues. An amendment from Scott to create regulatory ‘sandboxes’ for artificial intelligence was adopted. Proposals from Warren aimed at closing tokenization gaps and addressing crypto-enabled money laundering failed; she pointed to reports of actors using crypto to evade sanctions. Lummis rejected an amendment that sought banking regulator reports related to financier Jeffrey Epstein as unrelated to digital assets; that proposal did not pass.

Senator Chris Van Hollen proposed barring policymakers from issuing crypto assets; Republicans opposed the measure and characterized the effort as an ad hominem attack on the president, and the amendment failed. Senator Raphael Warnock withdrew an amendment he described as addressing corruption concerns after concluding he would not back the bill without specific carveouts. Senator Jack Reed argued the markup was not bipartisan, contending that the chair dismissed consideration of some Democratic amendments.

Other Democratic-backed proposals failed on party-line votes, including measures on stablecoins, a ban on federal bailouts of crypto firms proposed by Tina Smith, and an amendment from Catherine Cortez Masto to expand law enforcement authority in crypto-related investigations.

The bill is also under review in the Senate Agriculture Committee, which addresses rules tied to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. If identical language advances from both committees, CLARITY could reach the Senate floor; passage there would require 60 votes. Kristin Smith, president of the Solana Policy Institute, said she expects the House would likely approve identical language if the Senate assembles a measure with sufficient support.

Committee advancement does not set a final schedule for floor action. Further negotiations and votes are expected as lawmakers work toward a bill that could proceed to the full Senate.