The CLARITY Act is set to face a procedural vote in the U.S. Senate on September 15 (local time) ahead of a requirement for 60 votes. As state attorneys general and policy groups oppose a bill on the market structure for cryptocurrencies and urge lawmakers to vote it down, attention in the financial and digital asset markets is focused on how the bill will fare.
Key points
The CLARITY bill must secure 60 votes in a Senate procedural vote before it can move on to the next stage.
Eighteen state attorneys general from the Republican and Democratic parties urged the bill’s dismissal in a joint letter.
PPI said that even the recently revised version leaves gaps in anti-money-laundering and ethics regulations.
Senate vote: The 60-vote threshold is a turning point
This Senate vote is a test of whether the legislation pushed by the Republicans can clear the crucial procedural gate. Because it is difficult for Republicans alone to reach the quorum (60 votes), at least some Democratic senators’ support is necessary. If the vote surpasses 60 votes, the bill does not immediately move to the president; instead, it goes to follow-up Senate procedures that leave room for additional consideration and amendments.
Ahead of the vote, the Republican Party modified the bill to persuade Democrats. The revised version includes measures to strengthen conflict-of-interest rules and ethics standards, explicitly state the authority of the chief state attorney general for enforcement, and introduce temporary regulatory provisions designed to address concerns that stablecoins compete with bank deposits. While assessments say these changes have somewhat improved the bill’s chances of passing, analyses dominate that they were still not enough to fully appease the opposing camp.
On September 14, Letitia James, New York’s attorney general, organized a bipartisan amicus effort with 17 state attorneys general from both the Republican and Democratic parties to make their opposition to the bill official. In a statement, she criticized that, “Under the current proposal, the CLARITY Act would not only give wings to fraudsters, but could also encroach on the authority of attorneys general to protect our state’s investors and their wallets.” She then added, “Working together with fellow attorneys general, I strongly urge Congress not to pass the CLARITY Act.”
Related articles: Why OpenAI and Anthropic-backed AI speed control, and China’s Moonshot and Deepseek drew a line
PPI also says: “You have to cast a no vote.”
The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), a progressive-leaning think tank, also called on senators to oppose the CLARITY Act. PPI argues that despite the additional amendments recently added by the Republicans, key concerns remain unresolved—such as risks to financial stability related to stablecoins, anti-money laundering (AML) requirements, and ethics standards.
Paul Weinstein Jr., senior research fellow at PPI, assessed that the bill does not include sufficient minimal safeguards to curb illegal financial transactions and corruption.
In a statement, PPI said, “Senators must cast no votes against the CLARITY Act in its current form, and they must jointly design new legislation that includes practical safeguards necessary to promote a sound stablecoin industry.”
PPI also criticized in a separate commentary that the bill still falls far short “in terms of robust anti-money-laundering and ethical norms.” Given the political reality that Republicans need to win over Democratic votes in the procedural vote, the criticism may be unavoidable as a political burden.
It’s not “additional negotiations” even if it passes, nor “complete repeal” if it fails
If the Senate secures 60 votes in the floor vote, the bill is not passed to final approval but is instead sent to an additional consideration and amendment process within the Senate. At this stage, detailed provisions could be adjusted and negotiations could take place on further amendments.
Even if it fails to secure 60 votes, the bill is not immediately discarded. Another procedural delay would occur, and there remains room for both the Republican and Democratic parties to sit back at the negotiating table and seek bipartisan agreement through additional revisions.
The CLARITY Act has been fraught with difficulties even after passing the House. On July 17, 2025, the House passed H.R. 3633 by a relatively comfortable margin of 294 to 134. However, after that, as discussions in the Senate significantly changed the bill’s contents, an adjustment procedure for differences between the House and Senate is essential for final legislation. Only if the House and Senate reach the same final version can the bill be sent to the president.
More to read: Stellar trading volume surges 221%… the $0.20 resistance line holding back XLM