Exchange Ranking
Top Exchanges
24h Volume Ranking
Popularity Ranking
Exchange BTC Balance
Proof of Reserves
Decentralized Exchanges
Funding Rate
Funding Heatmap
Liquidation Data
Max Pain
Long/Short Ratio
Whale L/S Ratio
Binance/Okex/Huobi L/S
Bitfinex Margin L/S
ETF Tracker
Solana ETF
XRP ETF
Hong Kong ETF
Bitcoin Treasuries
Crypto Reversal
Ethereum Reserves
HyperLiquid Wallet Analysis
Hyperliquid Whale Watch
Large Transactions
On-chain Movement
Bitcoin ROI
Stablecoin Market Cap
Options Analysis
News
Articles
Economic Calendar
Features
Wallet
Contract Calculator
Security
Collections
Watchlist
Following
TRUMP Latest developments on the CLARITY bill: Loomis and Warren open confrontation
The Senate debate on the CLARITY bill has suddenly escalated. Senators Cynthia Loomis and Elizabeth Warren publicly criticized each other over the ethics provisions of the bill. Warren's team released a formal analysis, and Loomis responded directly.
At the heart of the dispute is the wording of the ethics clause released by Republican negotiators on July 22. After Warren reviewed the text by his minority staff team on the Senate Banking Committee, he believed the provision was "riddled with loopholes." Their analysis points out that these regulations cannot prevent President Trump from continuing to profit from his cryptocurrency business.
According to financial disclosures, in 2025 alone, Trump earned more than US$1.4 billion from the cryptocurrency field. His businesses include $TRUMP Memin and World Liberty Financial. Warren's team believes that even if the rules are technically applicable to his profits, enforcement powers will be exercised by the Justice Department, which he appoints. The ethics controversy has put the bill on hold for weeks.
Loomis refuted the Democratic Party's analysis. She accused Warren of prioritizing opposition to Trump over consumer protection, writing that Warren "hates President Trump so much that he would rather have no rules for the digital asset industry." She defended three specific elements of the ethics clause and called Warren's case statement dishonest. Loomis has long argued that the goal of the clause is to establish lasting and uniform moral standards among the three branches of government, rather than targeting a specific official.
Current situation of the bill
The Senate Banking Committee advanced the CLARITY bill in May. Ethics issues have since blocked the bill in the Senate. A bipartisan counterproposal proposed by Senators Tom Tillis and Ruben Gallego arrived at the White House on Thursday. The proposal would give state attorneys general the power to sue the Justice Department if it failed to enforce ethics laws against federal officials. A previous White House proposal failed to win enough Democratic support. Senate Majority Leader John Thun had previously promised to hold a full house vote before the August 8 recess. Loomis has closed the door to further negotiations. "I think we vote directly and just let nature take its course," she said. The White House's response to the Tills-Gallego proposal will determine whether a vote can be held before the recess.
