18 Attorneys General Oppose Clarity Act Ahead of Key Senate Vote

• "The law would embolden scammers," warn the attorneys general.
• Tomorrow, the Senate will decide whether to open debate on the bill.

A bipartisan coalition of 18 U.S. attorneys general sent a letter today, September 14, 2026, to Senators Tim Scott and Elizabeth Warren taking a stance on the Clarity Act. The initiative from the judicial officials argues that the legislative proposal would weaken existing state tools against financial crimes targeting investors nationwide.

New York Attorney General Letitia James, who leads the group, warned that the measure "would jeopardize their ability to protect investors from widespread fraud and scams involving cryptocurrencies."

The state representatives requested to halt the bill's progress in Congress. "As currently drafted, the law would embolden scammers and could deprive attorneys general of our authority to protect investors in our states and their finances. Along with my fellow attorneys general, I urge Congress not to pass the Clarity Act," demanded James.

The New York official argued the harm suffered by victims. "The financial impact of cryptocurrency scams on victims can be devastating," she stated in the letter.

Furthermore, the coalition outlined the regulatory complications anticipated for investigative agencies. "In its current form, the Clarity Act would create confusion, making it difficult for the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) and attorneys general across the country to continue their efforts to combat cryptocurrency scams and hold accountable the platforms that violate the law," the authorities detailed.

The judicial front warned that the legislation includes provisions to grant powers to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to override state registration authorities.

Regarding the transfer of power to the federal regulator, the jurists noted: "This unprecedented grant of authority would not only apply to digital assets but would also give the SEC broad unilateral discretion to redefine the scope of federal supremacy, which could disrupt the state regulatory regime for securities. Attorneys general assert that Congress should not cede such significant power to the SEC."

In light of this situation, the state representation advocated for four points: preserving the territorial role in law enforcement for both tokenized and non-tokenized securities, maintaining cooperation between the federal government and the states, codifying the state regulatory function by requiring mandatory certification of platforms, and clarifying the ambiguous language of the text.

The document sent to the Legislative Power was signed by attorneys from Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, Ohio, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, the District of Columbia, and New York.

The collective action comes just before the U.S. Senate decides tomorrow, September 15, 2026, whether to open debate on the initiative. As reported by CriptoNoticias, the vote, scheduled for 2:15 PM Eastern Time, requires 60 votes to authorize formal discussion of the 635-page substitute draft in the parliamentary chamber.