US Senate Judiciary Committee Pushes To Strip Developer Safeguards From Crypto Bill

TheNewsCryptoОпубликовано 2026-01-19Обновлено 2026-01-19

Введение

Senior members of the US Senate Judiciary Committee, including Chairman Chuck Grassley and ranking member Dick Durbin, have urged the Senate Banking Committee to remove developer safeguards from a proposed cryptocurrency market structure bill. They argue that provisions like the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (BRCA)—which exempts non-custodial software developers from money transmission laws—could create enforcement gaps in combating money laundering and unlicensed financial activities. The Judiciary Committee claims jurisdiction over such criminal statutes and emphasizes that it was not consulted during the drafting process. The dispute reflects broader legislative challenges in crypto regulation, including stablecoin oversight and inter-agency coordination.

Senior members of the US Senate Judiciary Committee have called upon the Senate Banking Committee to exploit the so-called developer protections proposed in the current version of the cryptocurrency market structure bill, citing that the bill may obstruct the enforcement of federal law relating to money transmission.

The letter was written to members of the Senate Banking Committee and was signed by GOP Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and ranking member Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, where the two explain that some parts of the bill, in particular, the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act, or BRCA, would create “significant gaps in enforcement for decentralized platforms if not fixed.”

So, under this rule, software developers and providers who fail to exercise power over users’ funds will not be covered by national or state money transmission laws. Advocates of this rule believe that this rule protects software developers of non-custodial software from being held responsible for how their software is used by its users.

Senate Judiciary Committee leaders Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin said the provisions on developer safeguards were left out of the larger crypto market structure bill because issues such as criminal law, unlicensed money transmission, and anti-money laundering enforcement are within the purview of the Judiciary Committee. The senators said that the committee was never consulted in advance about the inclusion of those provisions and underscored that any changes that impact federal criminal statutes have to go through the Judiciary Committee process.

Legislative Processes and Larger Context

Pro-developer protection lawmakers have argued that software developers who do not custody or control users’ funds should not be considered money transmitters, as is reflected in the BRCA introduced by Senators like Cynthia Lummis and Ron Wyden, which seeks to clarify that non-custodial developers are not subject to money transmission laws.

But the Senate Judiciary Committee’s leadership had concerns that including similar protections within the crypto market structure bill would muddle how the concept would be enforced and confuse how current criminal statutes—such as those dealing with money laundering and unlawful financial activity—are applied. They said it’s in their committee’s jurisdiction and should be pursued through separate legislation.

The market structure bill has also encountered some procedural issues and legislative challenges as various parties have expressed their disquiet regarding its breadth and structure. The current negotiations also encompass some outstanding issues regarding stablecoin regulation and sharing regulatory control between federal regulatory bodies such as the SEC and CFTC.

Such tendencies are part of larger Congress debates in forming digital asset legislation structure in matters such as the responsibility of developers, enforcement powers, and coordination in regulations, still under consideration by lawmakers as they continue to shape the framework of oversight of the US crypto industry.

Highlighted Crypto News:

Crypto Analyst Points to the Bloody Monday Factor After Crypto Market Slips

Связанные с этим вопросы

QWhat is the main concern raised by the US Senate Judiciary Committee regarding the cryptocurrency market structure bill?

AThe main concern is that the bill's developer protections, particularly the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (BRCA), may create significant gaps in enforcement for decentralized platforms and obstruct the enforcement of federal laws related to money transmission, money laundering, and unlicensed money transmission.

QWhich senators signed the letter to the Senate Banking Committee opposing the developer safeguards in the crypto bill?

AThe letter was signed by GOP Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and ranking member Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

QWhat does the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (BRCA) propose for non-custodial software developers?

AThe BRCA proposes that software developers and providers who do not exercise control over users' funds should not be covered by national or state money transmission laws, protecting them from being held responsible for how their software is used.

QWhy did the Senate Judiciary Committee claim jurisdiction over the developer safeguards provisions?

AThe committee claimed jurisdiction because issues such as criminal law, unlicensed money transmission, and anti-money laundering enforcement fall within its purview, and it was not consulted in advance about including these provisions in the bill.

QWhat broader legislative challenges is the crypto market structure bill facing besides the developer safeguards issue?

AThe bill is facing procedural issues and challenges related to its breadth and structure, including ongoing negotiations on stablecoin regulation and the sharing of regulatory control between federal agencies like the SEC and CFTC.

Похожее

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

The article "iQiyi Is Too Impatient" discusses the controversy surrounding the Chinese streaming platform IQiyi's recent announcement of an "AI Actor Library" during its 2026 World Conference. IQiyi claimed over 100 actors, including well-known names like Zhang Ruoyun and Yu Hewei, had joined the initiative. CEO Gong Yu suggested AI could enable actors to "star in 14 dramas a year instead of 4" and that "live-action filming might become a world cultural heritage." The announcement quickly sparked backlash. Multiple actors named in the list issued urgent statements denying they had signed any AI-related authorization agreements. This forced IQiyi to clarify that inclusion in the library only indicated a willingness to *consider* AI projects, with separate negotiations required for any specific role. The incident, which trended on social media with hashtags like "IQiyi is crazy," is presented as a sign of the company's growing desperation. Facing intense competition from short-video platforms like Douyin and Kuaishou, as well as Bilibili and Xiaohongshu, IQiyi's financial performance has weakened, with revenues declining for two consecutive years. The author argues that IQiyi is "too impatient" to tell a compelling AI story to reassure the market, especially as it pursues a listing on the Hong Kong stock exchange. The piece concludes by outlining three key "AI questions" IQiyi must answer: defining its role as a tool provider versus a content creator, balancing the "coldness" of AI with the human element audiences desire, and properly managing the interests of platforms, actors, and viewers. The core dilemma is that while AI can reduce costs and increase efficiency, it risks creating homogenized, formulaic content and devaluing human performers.

marsbit50 мин. назад

Jensen Huang Publicly Challenges Google and Amazon, Is the Chip Business Entirely Sustained by Anthropic?

In a candid interview, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang challenged competitors like Google and Amazon, admitted past strategic errors, and criticized U.S. export controls on AI chips. He framed Nvidia’s role as turning “electricity in, tokens out,” emphasizing the complexity and value of AI inference. Huang dismissed rival custom chips like Google’s TPU and Amazon’s Trainium as inflexible and niche, claiming their growth relies heavily on clients like Anthropic. He also acknowledged missing early investment opportunities in OpenAI and Anthropic. On China, Huang warned that export restrictions risk pushing the country toward self-sufficiency and could cost U.S. leadership in AI. Finally, he explained Nvidia’s acquisition of Groq as a move to serve premium, low-latency token markets. Throughout, Huang emphasized ecosystem trust and Nvidia’s central role in global AI infrastructure.

marsbit55 мин. назад

Jensen Huang Publicly Challenges Google and Amazon, Is the Chip Business Entirely Sustained by Anthropic?

marsbit55 мин. назад

ARK's SpaceX IPO Investment Guide: $1.75 Trillion Valuation, 95x Price-to-Sales Ratio, Where Is the Money Going?

ARK Invest, a major investor in SpaceX, provides an analysis following SpaceX's confidential IPO filing on April 1, 2026, targeting a $1.75 trillion valuation and up to $75 billion in funding for a Nasdaq listing around June 2026. This would be the largest IPO in history. The valuation implies a price-to-sales ratio of ~95x based on ~$18.5B in projected 2025 revenue. ARK argues this reflects future potential, not current reality. Key drivers include Starlink, with over 10M users and $20B+ in 2026 revenue, launch services which have reduced costs by ~95% since 2008, and the strategic merger with xAI in February 2026, enabling vertically integrated AI and orbital computing. ARK’s investment thesis is based on SpaceX's proven execution of ambitious goals, like reusable rockets and global satellite internet. The firm notes that significant value creation often occurs pre-IPO, and its Venture Fund offers exposure to SpaceX’s earlier private stages. Post-IPO, the fund will manage the position per standard lock-up and rebalancing processes, maintaining flexibility to reinvest in other private innovations. The analysis is based on public estimates and ARK research; the S-1 filing is not yet public. This is not investment advice.

marsbit56 мин. назад

ARK's SpaceX IPO Investment Guide: $1.75 Trillion Valuation, 95x Price-to-Sales Ratio, Where Is the Money Going?

marsbit56 мин. назад

Stablecoin Hype Overblown? Moody’s Says Banks Aren’t In Danger

The article discusses the legislative stalemate in the US over the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (CLARITY Act), which aims to regulate crypto assets. A key point of contention is whether stablecoins should be allowed to pay interest, with crypto companies opposing a ban and banks supporting it. Moody's analyst Abhi Srivastava states that, for now, stablecoins do not pose a significant threat to traditional banks due to existing efficient payment systems and the current prohibition on yield-bearing stablecoins. This limits their appeal for pulling deposits from banks at scale. However, with the stablecoin market cap exceeding $300 billion and growth in tokenized assets, banks could face future pressure from deposit outflows. The crypto industry warns that failure to pass the bill could lead to stricter regulatory crackdowns. Negotiations continue with little progress, despite both sides desiring a resolution.

bitcoinist1 ч. назад

Stablecoin Hype Overblown? Moody’s Says Banks Aren’t In Danger

bitcoinist1 ч. назад

Not a Price Hike, but a Supply Cut? Oil Prices Have Crossed the Tipping Point

The global oil market has passed a critical point, shifting the focus from price increases to potential physical supply shortages. The core issue is a time mismatch: even if the Strait of Hormuz reopens, shipping disruptions have already caused significant delays, which will continue to deplete onshore crude inventories for weeks. Refinery behavior acts as an amplifier. Reduced runs in Asia and Europe don’t reflect weaker demand but instead shrink product inventories, raising fuel prices and refining margins, which in turn encourages higher runs—creating a self-reinforcing cycle. If the Strait remains closed beyond April, traditional pricing models may fail. The market could face an unprecedented physical shortfall of 11-13 million barrels per day—roughly four times historical disruption levels. In such a scenario, price becomes an inadequate balancing tool. The only way to rebalance the market would be policy-driven demand destruction, similar to COVID-era lockdowns. Current prices around $95/barrel are insufficient to balance the market. Key signals to watch include inventory levels, policy announcements, and the pace of involuntary demand contraction. Geopolitically, the situation appears likely to worsen before improving, with little room for compromise between the US and Iran.

marsbit3 ч. назад

Not a Price Hike, but a Supply Cut? Oil Prices Have Crossed the Tipping Point