Trump Backs New Bipartisan Ethics Clause in Sweeping Crypto Bill

Washington – In a move that many saw as a last‑minute compromise, President Donald Trump told lawmakers he would go along with a sizable slice of a tough ethics amendment tucked into a sweeping cryptocurrency bill that’s slated for a crucial vote this week.

The original version of the legislation only barred federal officials, their spouses and federal judges from issuing digital assets. That, however, didn’t sit well with a coalition of Democrats and a handful of Republicans who feared the language left too many loopholes for Trump’s own crypto holdings.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R‑N.C.) and Sen. Ruben Gallego (D‑Ariz.), along with other members of the Senate, pushed for stronger language that would give state attorneys general, not just the Justice Department, a real enforcement role. Their support would be essential for the bill to clear the Senate floor on Tuesday.

Republican sponsors of the measure – Sens. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, Tim Scott of South Carolina and John Boozman of Arkansas – hailed the president’s concession, noting it adds a “meaningful role” for state AGs in policing the new crypto rules if the bill becomes law.

“At every step of the way during the Clarity Act negotiations, the White House and Senate Republicans have been responsive to Democrats’ stated policy objectives,” White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt posted on X on Sunday night. “After more than a year’s worth of negotiations, it’s time to pass this bipartisan bill.”

Behind closed doors, some White House officials expressed worry that handing enforcement power to state attorneys general could become a partisan weapon – Democrats might target Trump‑aligned interests, while Republican AGs could go after Democratic officials. Yet a senior GOP aide, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the president had accepted roughly 80 % of Tillis and Gallego’s proposal, chiefly the state‑AG enforcement clause.

The revised bill, expected to be released later Sunday, will also require anyone with a “significant” financial stake in a cryptocurrency‑issuing entity to either divest or place those holdings in a blind trust. Moreover, it will let state AGs sue an exchange if it lists a digital asset that the bill otherwise bans.

Lawmakers from both sides have not yet responded to requests for comment on the latest developments.