A warmer welcome?
The United States is signaling a more open stance toward digital assets, as the Trump administration shifts from enforcement-first policies to a clearer and more supportive regulatory approach. An analysis by Jenner & Block.
The United States remains a uniquely complex regulatory environment for cryptocurrency and digital assets. Unlike many jurisdictions, the U.S. features multiple regulators with overlapping—and sometimes unclear—areas of remit as well as additional layers of regulation in some—but not all—of the 50 states. Since Jenner and Block’s last update, in October 2024, the United States moved towards a potential watershed moment for the crypto industry with the reelection of Donald Trump to a second term as the President of the United States. Trump promised on the campaign trail to prioritise crypto, and early signs show a commitment to that promise. As of this writing, the first federal legislation appears imminent, lasting structural reform remains on the horizon, and crypto projects considering exposure to the United States will notice a much friendlier tenor from regulators.
The U.S. Regulatory Environment is Generally Friendlier to Crypto Assets
The White House, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ, federal law enforcement agency), the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC, federal securities regulator), the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC, federal derivatives regulator), and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC, federal bank regulator) have all indicated a friendlier stance on crypto.
The United States has long lacked any comprehensive regulation for crypto, and since cryptocurrencies first appeared on the market, federal agencies—especially the SEC—have relied on enforcement actions to regulate the crypto industry. Because U.S. courts and regulators often wield broad authority to impose significant penalties on conduct and parties outside of the United States, and enforcement actions are individualised and inherently unpredictable, the prior U.S. enforcement-based approach to crypto regulation created for an inherently uncertain environment.[1] Accordingly, the Trump administration’s promises to bring a semblance of order to crypto resonated across the industry.
Thus far, the Trump Administration has moved away from an enforcement-based approach to crypto regulation. The SEC dropped enforcement actions against major players in the space, such as Coinbase[2] and Binance,[3] and the DOJ disbanded its crypto-related enforcement team.[4] This does not mean that all enforcement has come to an end, as the DOJ has continued actions against crypto-related entities related to fraud and money laundering.[5] The SEC also created the Cyber and Emerging Technologies Unit (CETU) to replace its prior enforcement unit, noting that the new CETU would focus on combatting misconduct.[6] The CFTC is also broadly moving away from enforcement and toward self-reporting by regulated entities,[7] and Trump’s nominee for CFTC Chairman, Brian Quintenz, hails from a venture capital fund’s crypto unit.[8]
Other U.S. federal regulators are indicating a lighter touch on crypto as well. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Federal Reserve, which regulate banking in the United States, have withdrawn statements that discouraged banks from engaging with cryptocurrency.[9]
Ultimately, crypto projects weighing a U.S. entry can feel more comfortable that, at least for the next four years, U.S. federal regulators are unlikely to bring major enforcement actions except in cases of traditional financial misconduct, such as fraud, and other regulators will view these assets more neutrally. However, a lighter enforcement touch still does not necessarily create the certainty that projects desire.
U.S. Lawmakers Are Interested in Developing a Crypto-specific Regulatory Framework
In addition to moving away from an enforcement-based approach to crypto regulation, U.S. regulators and lawmakers have made efforts towards developing a crypto-specific regulatory framework. Should it come to fruition, a regulatory framework specific to the crypto industry could bring the United States more in line with international norms—including the frameworks now in force in the European Union, Switzerland, and Dubai.[10]
On President Trump’s first full day in the White House, January 21, 2025, the SEC announced a crypto task force with the goal to “set the SEC on a sensible regulatory path.”[11] Two days later, President Trump issued an executive order instructing federal agencies to work toward “providing regulatory clarity and certainty.”[12]
The SEC’s Task Force has since hosted a series of roundtables and solicited written input from the industry to develop the path forward.[13] The SEC staff has also issued guidance as to their view on discrete issues, including that meme coins may be treated more like collectibles than securities (and thus would not be within the SEC’s jurisdiction), and that certain staking activities and related services in connection with “proof-of-stake” blockchain networks do not involve the purchase or sale of securities and thus do not need require registration with the SEC.[14] The SEC Task Force is working to bring greater clarity on other areas and has generally signaled that it will work to make a friendlier regulatory environment.
Despite these changes, U.S. regulatory agencies lack the power to modify the law and so they cannot on their own create a more comprehensive framework along the lines of those in some other jurisdictions. Creating such a framework will likely require a legislative act of Congress. Both houses of Congress are actively working on crypto legislation that may provide the foundations for regulatory clarity, but as of this writing no legislation has been enacted, so a comprehensive framework that spans across the federal government has yet to take shape.
Two notable bills are currently making their way through Congress. The first, the “GENIUS Act,” focuses on stablecoin regulation.[15] The second, the “CLARITY Act,” would generally shift the regulation of crypto assets from the SEC to the CFTC.[16]
The proposed GENIUS Act would set out a framework for stablecoins, including a requirement that companies have a reserve of assets to back the stablecoin and provisions to address circumstances under which issuers may be licensed under state as opposed to federal law.
The proposed CLARITY Act focuses largely on clarifying the treatment of crypto assets under securities and commodities laws, and the respective roles of the SEC and CFTC and the SEC in regulating the industry. To that end, the CLARITY Act would exclude many crypto assets from the definition of “security” (regulated by the SEC), instead considering them to be digital “commodities” (regulated by the CFTC), while preserving SEC authority over certain fundraising activities and requiring SEC disclosures by token issuers. The CLARITY Act would also exclude from certain regulatory requirements developers and service providers of digital assets that do not take custody of assets or transmit money.
These proposed bills are making progress. The GENIUS Act was passed in the U.S. Senate on June 17, 2025,[17] while the CLARITY Act has moved out of committee in the House of Representatives.[18] While there are many steps ahead, these bills have cleared early hurdles to becoming U.S. law.
Other Risks to Crypto Assets Unique to the United States Remain
Until a comprehensive federal regulatory framework is created, federal governmental bodies may continue to differ in their approaches. And beyond the federal level, the United States also remains a uniquely complex regulatory landscape because the 50 states’ approaches to regulation and enforcement vary substantially. Each of the states has its own regulatory apparatus for financial services. In recent years, many state attorneys general (AGs) have actively brought actions against members of the crypto industry based on fraud and strict state regulatory laws.[19] Some states, notably California and New York, have their own specific crypto regulatory frameworks.[20] Regardless of how the federal regulatory framework takes shape, the industry must anticipate litigation or enforcement actions from the states. Accordingly, while the industry should be optimistic, any market participant should remain vigilant in ensuring compliance at the state level.
Another feature of the U.S. environment is the litigation risk from private plaintiffs. Private parties have brought actions against members of the industry based on a wide variety of novel and expansive theories of liability that seek to expand the sphere of potential defendants beyond just developers or token issuers under various theories of partnership, solicitation, conspiracy, and controlling person liability, among others.[21] Though most of these theories remain largely untested in courts, they present a risk for any crypto projects with exposure to the U.S. There are ways to substantially mitigate these private litigation risks, but they require a well-thought out strategy for exposure to the U.S.
The United States is an attractive environment, featuring the largest and most liquid market in the world for traditional securities. The appeal of the U.S. market for crypto is also undeniable, though its lack of certainty has made it difficult for entrants to develop a strategy. While President Trump’s election has undoubtedly made the U.S. more crypto-friendly in the short term, complexities remain for any long-term strategy. The risk profile has improved dramatically and any risk-adjusted business model should consider those changes, but with eyes wide open to the risks that remain. Consultation with counsel well-versed in these areas would allow any interested entity to better assess whether and when involvement in the U.S. market would match their goals.
Text by:
- Charles D. Riely, partner, Jenner & Block
- Kayvan B. Sadeghi, partner, Jenner & Block
- Lawrence W. McMahon, associate, Jenner & Block
- Ryan A. Miller, associate, Jenner & Block
- Navjit S. Sekhon, associate, Jenner & Block
—
Footnotes:
[1] Kayvan Sadeghi, Charles Riely, et al., To Stay or Go? The Oath (Oct. 2024), 22-25.
[2] S.E.C. v. Coinbase, Inc., No. 23 Civ. 4738 (KPF), Joint Stipulation to Dismiss (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 27, 2025), https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2025/stipulation-pr2025-47.pdf; see also Press Release No. 2025-47, SEC Announces Dismissal of Civil Enforcement Action Against Coinbase, U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (Feb. 27, 2025), https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025-47.
[3] S.E.C. v. Binance Holdings Ltd., No. 1:23-cv-01599-ABJ-ZMF, Joint Stipulation to Dismiss (D.D.C. May 29, 2025), https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/litreleases/2025/stipulation-dismissal-26316.pdf; see also Litigation Release No. 26316, SEC Announces Dismissal of Civil Enforcement Action Against Binance Entities and Founder Changpeng Zhao, U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (May 29, 2025) https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26316.
[4] Todd Blanche, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, U.S. Dep’t of Justice (Apr. 7, 2025), https://www.justice.gov/dag/media/1395781/dl?inline.
[5] See, e.g., U.S. Attorney’s Off. S.D.N.Y., OKX Pleads Guilty to Violating U.S. Anti-Money Laundering Laws and Agrees to Pay Penalties Totaling More Than $500 Million, U.S. Dep’t of Justice (Feb. 24, 2025), https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/okx-pleads-guilty-violating-us-anti-money-laundering-laws-and-agrees-pay-penalties; Off. of Pub. Affairs, Garantex Cryptocurrency Exchange Disrupted in International Operation, U.S. Dep’t of Justice (Mar. 7, 2025), https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/garantex-cryptocurrency-exchange-disrupted-international-operation.
[6] Press Release No. 2025-42, SEC Announces Cyber and Emerging Technologies Unit to Protect Retail Investors, U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (Feb. 20, 2025), https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025-42.
[7] Thomas E. Quinn, et al., CFTC Issues New Enforcement Advisory Aiming to Incentivize Self-Reporting and Cooperation, Jenner & Block LLP (Mar. 10, 2025), https://www.jenner.com/en/news-insights/publications/client-alert-cftc-issues-new-enforcement-advisory-aiming-to-incentivize-self-reporting-and-cooperation.
[8] Mengqi Sun, Trump Picks Brian Quintenz to Be CFTC Chairman, Wall St. J. (Feb. 13, 2025), https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-picks-brian-quintenz-to-be-cftc-chairman-3e23352d?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=ASWzDAjbt73jm-cfY7yeoibJ3CHQhzP2FOxbZE1yvlprsB5qK1z9Wk5l9_MA&gaa_ts=6840af86&gaa_sig=XWTb7_VWIpXc6YhTCT_25ugxP82qmi1LzTJNbt1_wnx5nwThQu-7MSJWpP9UuS6P1K0TOc4Is16NhCLBEVCgWQ%3D%3D.
[9] News Release 2025-42, OCC Clarifies Bank Authority to Engage in Crypto-Asset Custody and Execution Services, U.S. Off. of the Comptroller of the Currency (May 7, 2025), https://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2025/nr-occ-2025-42.html; Press Release, Agencies Withdraw Joint Statements on Crypto-Assets, U.S. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. (Apr. 24, 2025), https://www.fdic.gov/news/press-releases/2025/agencies-withdraw-joint-statements-crypto-assets; Press Release, Federal Reserve Board Approves Final Rule on Climate-Related Financial Risk Management, Bd. of Governors of Fed. Reserve Sys. (Apr. 24, 2025), https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/bcreg20250424a.htm.
[10] Kayvan B. Sadeghi & Lawrence W. McMahon, A Closer Look at the Global Regulatory Environment for Cryptocurrency and Digital Assets, Glob. Investigations Rev. (Aug. 7, 2025), https://globalinvestigationsreview.com/guide/the-guide-compliance/third-edition/article/closer-look-the-global-regulatory-environment-cryptocurrency-and-digital-assets.
[11] Press Release No. 2025-30, SEC Crypto 2.0: Acting Chairman Uyeda Announces Formation of New Crypto Task Force, U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (Jan. 21, 2025), https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025-30.
[12] Exec. Order No. 14178, Strengthening American Leadership in Digital Financial Technology, 90 Fed. Reg. 8647 (Jan. 23, 2025), https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/DCPD-202500169/pdf/DCPD-202500169.pdf.
[13] Hester M. Peirce, There Must Be Some Way Out of Here, U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (Feb. 21, 2025), https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/peirce-statement-rfi-022125.
[14] Div. Corporate Fin., Staff Statement on Meme Coins, U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (Feb. 27, 2025), https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/staff-statement-meme-coins; Div. Corporate Fin., Statement on Certain Protocol Staking Activities, U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (May 29, 2025), https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/statement-certain-protocol-staking-activities-052925.
[15] GENIUS Act of 2025, S. 394, 119th Cong. (2025), https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/394/text.
[16] Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025, H.R. 3633, 119th Cong. (2025), https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/3633/text.
[17] Amrith Ramkumar, Senate Passes Stablecoin Bill in Big Win for Crypto Industry, Wall St. J. (June 17, 2025), https://www.wsj.com/finance/currencies/senate-passes-stablecoin-bill-in-big-win-for-crypto-industry-44ee8aeb.
[18] Press Release, Emmer’s Securities Clarity Act and Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act Pass House Financial Services Committee Markup, Rep. Tom Emmer (MN-6) (June 11, 2025), https://emmer.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/emmer-s-securities-clarity-act-and-blockchain-regulatory-certainty-act-pass-house-financial-services-committee-markup.
[19] See, e.g., Office of Att’y Gen., Attorney General Bonta Protects Californians by Shutting Down 42 Fake Cryptocurrency Websites in 2024, Cal. Dep’t of Justice (Mar. 10, 2025), https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-protects-californians-shutting-down-42-fake. Press Release, Attorney General James Sues Cryptocurrency Companies NovaTechFx and AWS Mining for Defrauding Investors Out of Over $1 Billion, N.Y. Att’y Gen. (June 6, 2024), https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2024/attorney-general-james-sues-cryptocurrency-companies-novatechfx-and-aws-mining; Press Release, Attorney General James Recovers $50 Million from Crypto Firm Gemini for Defrauded Investors, N.Y. Att’y Gen. (June 14, 2024), https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2024/attorney-general-james-recovers-50-million-crypto-firm-gemini-defrauded; Press Release, Attorney General James Secures Settlement Worth $2 Billion from Crypto Firm Genesis Global Capital for Defrauded Victims, N.Y. Att’y Gen. (May 20, 2024), https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2024/attorney-general-james-secures-settlement-worth-2-billion-crypto-firm-genesis.
[20] See Digital Financial Asset Businesses, Cal. A.B. 1934 (2023–24 Reg. Sess.); 23 N.Y.C.R.R. 200 et seq., N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs; see also Cal. Dep’t of Fin. Prot. & Innovation, Cryptocurrency, https://dfpi.ca.gov/consumers/crypto/; N.Y. Dep’t of Fin. Servs., Virtual Currency Businesses, https://www.dfs.ny.gov/virtual_currency_businesses. Washington State is another state with a distinct regulatory framework, exemplifying the complexities of operating within the United States. See FinTech Licensing and Regulation Guidance, Wash. Dep’t of Fin. Inst., https://dfi.wa.gov/fintech/industry.
[21] See, e.g., Stephen Gannon, et al., Samuels v. Lido DAO: A Potential New Frontier for Liability in the Cryptocurrency Space, N.Y.U. Compliance & Enforcement Blog (Jan. 14, 2025), https://wp.nyu.edu/compliance_enforcement/2025/01/14/samuels-v-lido-dao-et-al-a-potential-new-frontier-for-liability-in-the-cryptocurrency-space/.
