Trump Urges Senate to Pass CLARITY Act as Warren Demands Ethics Rules

Highlights:

• President Trump urged the Senate to pass the CLARITY Act, warning against letting China dominate digital assets.
• Elizabeth Warren called for strict ethics rules to stop officials and their families from profiting through crypto.
• Warren cited Trump’s disclosed $1.4 billion crypto income, arguing the bill needs safeguards against conflicts of interest.

U.S. President Donald Trump urged the Senate on July 13 to pass the Digital Asset Market CLARITY Act, arguing that the United States must protect its lead in cryptocurrency and artificial intelligence from China. On the same day, Senator Elizabeth Warren called for any crypto market structure bill reaching the Senate floor to include strict ethics rules covering elected officials and their families.

Trump made his appeal in a Truth Social post published at 10:26 a.m. EDT. He said the Senate should approve the CLARITY Act “in honor of Senator Lindsey Graham,” whom he described as a major supporter of the legislation. Trump also warned that China and other countries want to gain control of the growing digital asset sector and compete with the United States in artificial intelligence.

🚨NEW: President Trump says the Senate should pass the Clarity Act in honor of Senator Lindsey Graham, saying the late South Carolina Republican was a “big supporter” of the legislation. https://t.co/M6ERKHuGNR

— Eleanor Terrett (@EleanorTerrett) July 13, 2026

Trump Links Crypto Rules to Global Competition

The CLARITY Act is designed to create a federal regulatory structure for the U.S. crypto market. A major part of the bill would clarify when a digital asset falls under the Securities and Exchange Commission and when it should be regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). 

Supporters say clearer rules could protect investors while giving crypto companies more certainty about how they can operate in the United States. The Senate Banking Committee advanced its version of H.R. 3633 in a bipartisan vote on May 14. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has indicated that he wants the wider Senate to consider crypto market structure legislation in July. 

Trump presented the legislation as part of a larger competition for technological leadership. “Don’t let China win on either subject,” he wrote, referring to crypto and AI.

Warren Demands Ethics Rules in the CLARITY Act

Senator Warren raised a different concern in a July 13 letter to Thune and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. She urged Senate leaders to ensure that the president, vice president, senior administration officials, members of Congress and their families cannot profit from the crypto industry while shaping its rules. 

The Massachusetts Democrat based her concerns on Trump’s 2025 public financial disclosure, released by the Office of Government Ethics on June 30. Warren said the filing showed that Trump made roughly $1.4 billion from cryptocurrency ventures during 2025 and that crypto accounted for most of his reported income.

Her letter also cited Trump family interests connected to World Liberty Financial. Warren said DT Marks DeFi LLC generated more than $590 million in income during 2025 and holds an interest in the company structure behind World Liberty Financial. 

NEW: 🇺🇸Sen. Elizabeth Warren is urging Senate leaders to add ethics rules to the CLARITY Act that would bar government officials and their families from profiting off crypto. pic.twitter.com/xJyAUChZhl

— The Crypto Johannes (@TheCryptoJonny) July 14, 2026

Warren said the current Senate draft still raises concerns involving national security, financial stability, consumer protection and ethics. She argued that legislation should not increase the value of officials’ private crypto holdings without safeguards against conflicts of interest.

Warren wants the bill to include stronger limits on how public officials and their families can benefit financially from the industry.  The next Senate debate is likely to focus not only on which agency regulates crypto, but also on whether ethics provisions become part of the final legislation.