Elizabeth Warren’s opposition to crypto is widely known, cemented by her own declaration that she was “building an Anti- Crypto Army.”

This week, she is being accused of trying to derail recent legislation, with critics pointing specifically to the Clarity Act. On Wednesday, Alex Thorn, Galaxy Digital’s head of firmwide research, said Warren had attached a large number of amendments to the bill.

Thorn said:

“Elizabeth Warren has filed 38 amendments to market structure bill:

– remove developer protections

– more sanctions compliance obligations

– more illicit activity powers for govt

– more AML obligations for DeFi, front ends

– repeal positive OCC guidances for banks

– gut SEC’s ability to allow tokenization”

Many crypto supporters took aim at the Massachusetts senator in replies to Thorn’s X post. “Warren has got to be on the top ten all-time worst in Congress list,” one person wrote. “She really is two-faced,” another added. “Claiming to care about the consumer while pushing us back into the anxious hands of big banks.”

This sentiment echoed across the digital currency community, with supporters arguing that while she presents herself as a defender of everyday Americans, her actions instead fortify the interests of the banking cartel.

One X posts states:

“A reminder that Liz Warren’s political career began with the Occupy Wall Street movement. Now she’s effectively a banking cartel lobbyist.”

When Wyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis posted on X, stating, “Today’s response from some in the industry proves they just are not ready, and while I am deeply disappointed, I am committed to taking this feedback and partnering with the industry to deliver a product that helps them thrive,” one individual replied bluntly, “Then you shouldn’t have added a single line from Elizabeth Warren.”

Also read: Ripple Locks RLUSD Into LMAX’s $8.2 Trillion Trading Engine

This is hardly the first time Warren has been labeled anti- crypto, with critics also pointing to her support for a central bank digital currency ( CBDC), reflected in her past remark, “In theory, a digital currency, issued and backed by a central bank, could provide the advantages of cryptocurrency without those risks.” It remains a widely held view that Warren’s objectives would drive the industry offshore, imposing heavy regulatory requirements under the banner of consumer protection and national security.

Taken together, the latest wave of criticism points to a broader unease within the digital asset community over how the Clarity Act is taking shape and which interests are likely to benefit once it is finalized. Warren’s additions are not the sole focus of frustration; for many industry participants, the deeper issue is not regulation itself, but whether the emerging framework preserves real space for innovation beyond the traditional financial (TradFi) system, safeguards the right to self-custody, and defends developers by treating software creation as a form of free speech.

• Why is Elizabeth Warren facing criticism over the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act?
  Critics say her 38 proposed amendments would tighten controls on crypto while favoring traditional banks.
• What concerns does the crypto industry have about the Clarity Act?
  Industry participants argue the bill may limit innovation, weaken developer protections, and restrict self-custody rights.
• How have crypto supporters reacted to Warren’s amendments?
  Many have voiced opposition on X, social media, and forums, accusing her of undermining digital assets under the banner of consumer protection.
• What broader issue does this debate highlight for U.S. crypto policy?
  The dispute reflects tension between regulation and preserving innovation, free software development, and decentralized finance in the United States.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。