Trump Backs Key Ethics Rules in Sweeping Cryptocurrency Bill to Secure Bipartisan Support

President Donald Trump has agreed to a major portion of a stringent ethics compromise embedded in comprehensive cryptocurrency legislation, clearing a significant procedural hurdle ahead of a critical Senate vote scheduled for this week, according to key Republican lawmakers leading the effort.

The legislative breakthrough was confirmed by three of the bill’s primary Republican authors—Sens. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, Tim Scott of South Carolina, and John Boozman of Arkansas. In a joint announcement, the lawmakers revealed that the president agreed to establish a "meaningful role" for state attorneys general to enforce the proposed cryptocurrency regulatory framework should it be enacted into law.

The broader legislative package, known as the Clarity Act, represents an extensive effort to establish regulatory ground rules for digital assets and has been the subject of intensive negotiations spanning more than a year. The concession from the White House comes at a decisive moment as Senate leaders work to assemble the necessary bipartisan coalition to move the legislation forward.

Patrick Witt, the White House crypto adviser, underscored the administration’s collaborative posture in a public statement posted to X on Sunday night. Witt stated that throughout the Clarity Act negotiations, both the White House and Senate Republicans had consistently responded to policy objectives raised by Democrats, adding that following more than a year of continuous talks, the time had arrived to pass the bipartisan measure.

Under the initial draft of the sweeping legislation, the ethics protections were comparatively narrow in scope. The original text contained only a baseline provision that prohibited all federally elected officials, their spouses, and federal judges from directly issuing digital assets themselves.

However, that initial language drew sharp pushback from a core group of Democrats as well as Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C. Tillis and Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., along with several other Democratic senators, argued that the limited restriction did not go far enough to resolve potential conflict-of-interest issues stemming from Trump’s personal cryptocurrency holdings and related wealth.

The support of Tillis and the Democratic bloc is considered essential for the legislation’s survival. Senate leaders require their votes to overcome procedural hurdles and successfully advance the comprehensive measure during a critical vote set for Tuesday.

According to a senior Republican aide who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity on Sunday night, Trump agreed to roughly 80 percent of the ethics proposal put forward by Tillis and Gallego. The aide highlighted the inclusion of state attorneys general in the enforcement mechanism as the central component of the compromise.

Under the updated version of the legislation, which was scheduled for release late Sunday, lawmakers added strict financial requirements for public officials. The revised text mandates that covered individuals must either fully divest from or place into a blind trust any "significant" financial interest they maintain in any entity that issues cryptocurrencies.

The compromise also directly addresses enforcement authorities by granting state attorneys general the power to step in and enforce the statute alongside the federal Department of Justice. The multi-jurisdictional enforcement mechanism had been one of the primary demands championed by Gallego, Tillis, and their allies.

Furthermore, Trump consented to specific statutory language that gives state attorneys general the power to take legal action against cryptocurrency exchanges. Under this provision, state prosecutors will be permitted to sue trading platforms if they list any digital asset that is prohibited under the broader terms of the bill.

The president's decision to accept the state-level enforcement powers followed considerable debate within the administration. In private discussions, White House officials had expressed notable skepticism and concern regarding the potential consequences of empowering state attorneys general to enforce federal digital asset rules.

According to two individuals familiar with the private discussions, White House aides were concerned that state enforcement authority could be used as a political weapon. Officials worried that Democratic state attorneys general might target Trump and other Republican officials with politically motivated lawsuits, while also noting the risk that Republican state attorneys general could similarly weaponize the statute against elected Democrats.

Despite those internal misgivings, the agreement paved the way for the updated bill to proceed toward Tuesday's scheduled vote. Aides to both Tillis and Gallego did not immediately return requests for comment on Sunday night regarding the White House's acceptance of the ethics provisions.