The US Senate failed the procedural vote on the Clarity Act by 49 to 50. That left the bill eleven votes short of the required 60-vote threshold. Four Republicans also voted against their own caucus. Before the vote, an ethics dispute over Trump's crypto wealth had pushed the Democrats into the no camp.
The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act runs in Congress under the number H.R. 3633. It splits oversight of crypto assets between the securities regulator SEC and the futures regulator CFTC. As a result, a federal legal framework would emerge for the first time. It would cover trading venues, brokers and issuers of digital commodities. The House first passed its version in July 2025 by 294 to 134 votes. The Senate took up the bill in September 2025. Subsequently, in May 2026, the Banking Committee cleared it by 15 to 9 votes. Since then, the industry has waited for the floor call.
Subscribe to our newsletter
The best articles of the week, directly delivered into your mailbox.
Ethics dispute over Trump's crypto wealth flips four Republican votes
On Sunday evening, before the vote, Republicans led by Senator Cynthia Lummis presented a revised version of the bill. It allows state attorneys general to sue crypto exchanges and the Justice Department. In addition, it requires officeholders to divest substantial financial holdings or move them into a blind trust. Formally, that duty applies to every officeholder. The business of the president's family triggered the debate, however. Democrats considered the clause unenforceable, since the Justice Department itself would decide on a suit against its own president. On law enforcement and national security, both sides stood close together. Yet the deal still broke down over the conflict of interest.
Trump's own crypto income sits at the center. His financial disclosure reports more than USD 1.4 billion from crypto business for the previous year. The proceeds come from the memecoin TRUMP and the family firm World Liberty Financial, among others. Several senators previously seen as undecided therefore voted no. Among them were Kirsten Gillibrand, Catherine Cortez Masto, Angela Alsobrooks, Cory Booker and Mark Warner. Overall, the Democratic caucus counts 47 members including the two independents. Everyone present voted against the bill.
"We came close on the toughest outstanding questions around law enforcement and national security, but ultimately the failure to address this fundamental conflict of interest made it impossible to support moving forward. That is why I voted no today." - Mark Warner, Senator (D-Virginia)
On the Republican side, Susan Collins, Josh Hawley, Jerry Moran and Thom Tillis broke ranks. Tillis had voted yes at first and then switched deliberately to no. That secured him the procedural right to file a motion to reconsider. His no was therefore mainly a procedural step. The senator spoke of substantial bipartisan progress, which he credited in large part to the White House.
Eleven votes short for the Clarity Act after twelve months in the Senate
No other market structure bill had ever come this far in Congress. In the House, all 216 Republicans present and 78 Democrats voted in favor in July 2025. In the Senate, the path then stretched over roughly twelve months. Only in early June 2026 did the Banking Committee formally report the bill back to the floor. Finally, Majority Leader John Thune filed cloture in August 2026, shortly before the summer recess.
The chamber returned from that recess one day before the vote. Still, the arithmetic stayed uncomfortable. With 53 of the 100 seats, the Republicans needed at least seven Democratic or independent votes for the 60-vote threshold. Supporters consequently counted on a handful of undecided Democrats. Not a single one of those votes materialized.
The official Senate record shows 49 yes votes and 50 no votes. Democrat Chris Coons did not take part, so the caucus supplied 46 no votes. Together with the four dissenting Republicans, that produced the reported 50. The text of the bill was not even up for debate. After all, cloture decides only whether a bill gets called up. The industry thus failed at the very entrance to the procedure.
A new attempt at the earliest after the midterms
For the rest of the year, the bill counts as blocked. The Senate moves into its campaign phase before the midterm elections on November 3. At the same time, the House has canceled its final two September session weeks. A new attempt is therefore possible at the earliest in a lame duck session after the elections. Those elections also decide the majorities with which a future Congress picks up the issue. Until then, the motion to reconsider that Tillis secured with his no remains an open procedural hook.
The SEC meanwhile works on its own rulemaking. Under the title "Regulation Crypto Assets", the comment period runs until October 20, 2026. SEC Chair Paul Atkins had announced his course the day before the vote. The agency would keep working regardless of the legislative outcome. However, a regulation from the agency does not replace a federal law. A future commission can withdraw it. Moreover, it does not conclusively settle the boundary with the CFTC.
