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
BTC 
ETH CLARITY法案面临各州强烈反对，参议院今日将举行关键投票
美国各州总检察长联合反对《CLARITY法案》中的相关规定，认为这些条款可能会削弱全美市场的反欺诈执法能力、牌照管理权限以及投资者保护措施。由于该法案在参议院的程序性表决需要获得60票支持才能通过，共和党领导人必须在立法进一步推进之前争取到民主党人的支持。
早在1980年的一份银行信函中就显示，货币市场基金曾发出过类似的存款警告，但随后货币基金和银行存款均实现了大幅增长。目前，《CLARITY法案》在参议院于美东时间下午2:15进行投票前，正面临日益增长的各州反对声浪。
新泽西州与纽约州领衔的跨党派联盟
纽约州总检察长莱蒂蒂亚·詹姆斯（Letitia James）领导着一个两党联盟，挑战那些可能削弱各州执法权力的条款。该法案需要60票才能进入下一阶段，这意味着共和党领导人必须获得民主党参议员的支持。
在9月14日致参议院银行委员会主席蒂姆·斯科特（Tim Scott）和资深成员伊丽莎白·沃伦（Elizabeth Warren）的一封信中，18位总检察长明确反对会影响欺诈起诉和各州证券注册要求的条款。该团体敦促参议员拒绝该法案，除非国会保留各州的监管和执法权力。
Although the proposal retains certain state anti-fraud powers, officials worry that vague restrictions could provide a basis for challenges to investigations and prosecutions. As a result, defendants may argue that federal rules override securities laws, delaying enforcement while the court determines jurisdiction.
Since 2017, states have filed more than 330 cryptocurrency anti-fraud lawsuits, targeting trading platforms, advisers and investment scams. According to records, the FBI recorded US$11.4 billion in cryptocurrency-related complaint losses in 2025, a year-on-year increase of 22%.
Breaking News: New York Attorney General Letitia James led 18 states to send a letter to the Senate opposing the Clarity Act.
- The bill strips states of the power to prosecute fraud.
- The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) preemption covers each state's registration rules.
Historical precedent provided by the 1980 money market fund case
At the same time, the banking industry also opposed the legislation from another angle. The American Bankers Association (ABA) and other banking groups believe that community banks may lose deposits as investors move money away from traditional platforms to platforms that provide stablecoin yields. They said it would reduce the amount of money available for loans and small business credit.
The controversy over stablecoin yields reflects banking opposition to money-market mutual funds in the 1970s. According to official documents shared by Omid Malekan on Platform X, the banking group made similar arguments to the Senate Banking Subcommittee in 1980.
Malekan shared a letter from January 1980 sent by the Independent Bankers Association to Senator Alan Cranston. The association warned that money-market funds could draw deposits, weaken lending capabilities and put pressure on small banks.
Many people have mentioned that the ongoing debate on stablecoin yields under the Clarity Act, and the arguments put forward by the bankers 'associations about yields, are similar to the debate over money market funds in the 1970s. Now there is conclusive evidence. This is a letter submitted by the Independent Bankers Association...
The number of publicly listed money market funds increased from 1 in 1972 to 78 in mid-1979. Its consolidated assets reached approximately $50 billion as investors sought market-based returns that were not available from restricted bank accounts. However, while money-market fund assets reached trillions of dollars, bank deposits were not eliminated. Research data from the Federal Reserve shows that bank deposits will be close to US$18 trillion in 2022.
稳定币和货币市场基金具有不同的结构、保护机制和流动性风险。尽管如此，这一先例挑战了“竞争性收益产品必然摧毁银行融资”的说法。参议员们在决定《CLARITY法案》是继续推进还是退回谈判时，必须权衡各州执法方面的关切。
