Coinbase’s abrupt decision to withdraw support for the CLARITY Act sent a shock through Washington and crypto markets as well. It triggered the cancellation of a scheduled Senate Banking Committee markup and reignited fears that US crypto market structure reform could once again stall.
However, if the immediate reaction appeared to be political chaos, the response that followed tells a more nuanced story.
SponsoredCLARITY Act Enters Critical Negotiation Phase After Coinbase Pull-Out
Rather than collapsing, the bill appears to have entered a tense but deliberate pause, one that lawmakers, industry leaders, and even the White House insist is part of the final stretch, not the end of the road.
Senate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott moved quickly to reframe the delay as constructive.
“I’ve spoken with leaders across the crypto industry, the financial sector, and my Democratic and Republican colleagues, and everyone remains at the table working in good faith,” Scott said.
According to Tim Scott, the goal remains delivering “clear rules of the road that protect consumers, strengthen national security, and ensure the future of finance is built in the US.”
Senator Cynthia Lummis, one of the bill’s key architects, reiterated the message, acknowledging frustration but rejecting the idea that Coinbase’s move had derailed the effort.
Inside the industry, Coinbase’s stance has exposed a clear split, but not a loss of momentum. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse highlighted the Senate’s effort as a significant step forward in providing workable frameworks for the crypto industry.
Sponsored SponsoredAcknowledging that “clarity beats chaos,” the Ripple executive remains optimistic that issues can be resolved during the markup process.
Meanwhile, a16z’s Chris Dixon struck a similar tone, arguing that while the bill is imperfect, now is the time to move the CLARITY Act forward. This comes as the US seeks to strengthen its position in the global cryptocurrency market.
Kraken executive Arjun Sethi went further, framing the moment as a test of political resolve rather than legislative failure.
“It is easy to declare failure. It is easy to walk away when a process gets difficult,” Sethi said, warning that abandoning the bill would “lock in uncertainty and leave American companies operating under ambiguity. At the same time, the rest of the world moves forward.”
Galaxy Digital CEO Mike Novogratz reinforced that view. Meanwhile, the White House also weighed in, highlighting the stakes.
SponsoredWhite House Urgency Meets Senate Frustration as CLARITY Act Debate Shifts
Crypto and AI czar David Sacks said passage of market structure legislation is “as close as it’s ever been.” With this, he urges the industry to use the pause to resolve differences, establish clear rules of the road, and secure the industry’s future.
Behind the scenes, however, frustration is a real concern. A Senate source cited by Decrypt’s Sander Lutz reportedly said Banking Committee members were “pretty pissed” about Coinbase’s last-minute announcement.
Sponsored Sponsored“The prevailing sense is it didn’t have to go down this way,” Lutz stated, citing the unnamed source.
That frustration likely contributed to leadership’s decision to pull the markup, as confirmed by journalist Eleanor Terrett. BeInCrypto will report once a new date is set.
Yet the broader debate is already shifting, amid cognizance of just how much the CLARITY Act is to the industry.
“…today’s high-stakes Senate Banking Committee vote on the CLARITY Act represents the final hurdle for defining SEC-CFTC jurisdictions,” Wenny Cai, COO at SynFutures told BeInCrypto.
Commentators like Echo X argue the fault line is no longer crypto versus banks. Rather, it is a clash of business models between exchange-dominated platforms and infrastructure-first systems that could outgrow any single company.
As Europe, the UK, and Asia continue to roll out unified crypto frameworks, pressure is mounting on US lawmakers to complete what they started.
For now, the CLARITY Act is paused, not buried. The coming weeks will determine whether this fragile consensus hardens into law—or fractures under competing incentives. What’s clear is that walking away now would carry its own cost: prolonged uncertainty at home, while regulatory clarity accelerates elsewhere.
