TLDR
- US crypto firms seek laws to prevent strict SEC enforcement return
- Companies cite high legal costs from past regulatory actions
- Industry warns policy shifts can reverse current regulatory clarity
- Firms say unclear rules pushed innovation outside the US
- Lawmakers face pressure to define stablecoin and market rules
US crypto firms are urging Congress to pass clear laws to avoid a return to strict regulatory enforcement. Industry leaders warn that past SEC actions created uncertainty and high legal costs. They argue that only legislation can ensure stability. The push comes amid concerns that future leadership changes could reverse current guidance and disrupt market growth.
Calls for Legislative Certainty Grow
US crypto companies are increasing pressure on lawmakers to create clear rules for digital assets. They say regulation through enforcement created confusion and raised compliance costs. Firms argue that agency guidance alone cannot provide long-term certainty.
Executives from major firms, including Ripple and Coinbase, have pointed to years of legal disputes. These disputes required large financial resources and slowed development. They argue that legislation would reduce reliance on enforcement actions. Brad Garlinghouse, CEO of Ripple, said in a recent interview that the industry cannot face “another cycle of unclear rules and enforcement.”
One thing @bgarlinghouse said to @MariaBartiromo that I completely agree with – is that American companies and our financial markets cannot afford to experience Gensler 2.0. And the only way to guarantee that we don’t – is by passing legislation.
Look, no one despises the… https://t.co/H958StIpRY pic.twitter.com/tOdj4N5wlJ
— John E Deaton (@JohnEDeaton1) March 30, 2026
He stressed that laws passed by Congress would provide stability across administrations. Industry participants also noted that current guidance from regulators could change. They warn that new leadership at agencies like the SEC may reverse existing positions. This concern has driven calls for binding legal frameworks.
Cost of Enforcement and Market Shifts
Crypto firms have reported spending hundreds of millions on legal defenses during past regulatory actions. Companies such as Kraken, Gemini, and Grayscale faced investigations or lawsuits. These cases often lasted years and required extensive legal work. Executives say these costs limit investment in technology and hiring. They also argue that uncertainty pushed some firms to move operations outside the United States.
This shift, they claim, reduced domestic innovation and competitiveness. The debate also includes banking access and financial services. Some industry voices have criticized traditional banks for high fees and slow transaction processes. They argue that blockchain technology offers faster and cheaper alternatives.
At the same time, lawmakers have reviewed proposals related to stablecoins and market structure. Some industry participants claim that certain provisions favor traditional financial institutions. They say this limits competition from crypto-based services.
Political Outlook and Regulatory Risks
The future direction of crypto regulation may depend on political control of Congress. Some industry figures have expressed concern about potential leadership changes in key committees. These committees oversee financial regulators, including the SEC. Senator Elizabeth Warren has been a vocal advocate for stricter crypto oversight.
Her stance has raised concerns among some market participants about future regulatory approaches. They fear a return to policies similar to earlier enforcement-focused strategies. In response, industry groups are encouraging compromise legislation. They suggest working within proposed frameworks while seeking flexible provisions.
This approach, they say, could allow innovation while meeting regulatory goals. Lawmakers continue to debate how to balance investor protection and market growth. While discussions are ongoing, no comprehensive crypto law has yet passed. Industry leaders maintain that clear legislation remains the most reliable path to stability.
