Journalist
Tanzeel Akhtar
Journalist
Share
This week’s regulatory developments show a familiar reality in Washington: there is broad agreement that crypto needs rules, but little consensus on how those rules should be written or who should take the lead.
That tension was on full display as Senate Judiciary leaders Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin raised concerns over a provision in Senate Banking Chair Tim Scott’s crypto market structure bill.
The language would exempt certain blockchain software developers from financial licensing requirements, a move lawmakers warned could weaken law enforcement’s ability to pursue money laundering and other illicit financial activity.
In a private letter first reported by Politico, Grassley and Durbin argued that the provision falls squarely under the Judiciary Committee’s jurisdiction and noted that their panel was not consulted before the markup was scheduled and later postponed.
The section closely mirrors the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act, a bipartisan proposal led by Senators Cynthia Lummis and Ron Wyden, but its inclusion has now become another flashpoint in an already fragile legislative process.
Market Structure Bill Slips Further Down the Agenda
Momentum behind the broader market structure bill continues to slow. According to reports, the Senate Banking Committee has again delayed work on the legislation, pushing consideration to late February or March. Instead, lawmakers are shifting focus to housing legislation following President Donald Trump’s renewed push on affordability.
The delay reinforces a growing concern within the crypto industry: despite years of debate, market structure reform remains vulnerable to political reprioritization. What was once positioned as urgent now risks being sidelined by competing legislative priorities.
Partisan Cracks Begin to Show
While the Banking Committee hesitates, the Senate Agriculture Committee is moving ahead, even without Democratic support. Chair John Boozman has scheduled a markup for January 27, acknowledging that “differences remain on fundamental policy issues” but signaling a willingness to proceed regardless.
If passed, the move would mark a shift away from bipartisan consensus toward a more partisan approach, raising questions about the long-term durability of any resulting framework in a divided Congress.
Regulators Step In as Lawmakers Stall
As Congress struggles, regulators are increasingly filling the gap. Newly appointed CFTC Chair Michael Selig this week declared the start of a “golden age” for U.S. financial markets, launching a “Future-Proof” initiative intended to update decades-old rules to reflect crypto, blockchain, and artificial intelligence.
At the White House, Digital Asset Advisor Patrick Witt added pressure from another angle, urging swift passage of a market structure bill. Pushing back against claims that “no bill is better than a bad bill,” Witt warned that failure to act now could invite far more punitive legislation under a future Democratic Congress, particularly in the aftermath of a market crisis.
Enforcement Pulls Back—Coordination Moves Forward
Meanwhile, enforcement trends continue to shift. A Cornerstone Research report found that SEC crypto enforcement actions fell 60% in 2025 following Paul Atkins’ appointment as chair, indicating a move away from regulation by enforcement and toward a more targeted focus on fraud.
That recalibration was reinforced this week as Atkins and Selig announced a joint event aimed at regulatory harmonization between the SEC and CFTC, a symbolic but meaningful step toward reducing the jurisdictional confusion that has long plagued U.S. crypto markets.
The Bigger Picture
Taken together, this week’s developments point to a clear pattern: legislative paralysis is pushing more responsibility onto regulators. Whether that results in clarity or further fragmentation will depend on whether coordination can replace congressional gridlock—and whether lawmakers can still reclaim leadership before agencies set the rules by default.
