News linked to both this project and an event.
According to Cointelegraph, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent published an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal urging Congress to swiftly pass the Crypto Asset Market and Regulatory Clarity Act (CLARITY Act) to clarify regulatory rules for cryptocurrencies, tokenized assets, and decentralized exchanges. He warned that the global cryptocurrency market has reached $3 trillion, challenging America’s leadership in financial innovation, and stressed that with limited time remaining on the Senate’s legislative calendar, delaying action is not an option. The bill passed the House of Representatives in July 2025 but has remained stalled in the Senate over disagreements regarding how to regulate stablecoin yield. A report by the White House Council of Economic Advisers found that banning stablecoin yield would have a negligible impact on bank lending—increasing it by only about $2.1 billion—while costing users approximately $800 million annually in lost welfare. Additionally, under the GENIUS Act, the Treasury Department has proposed new rules requiring stablecoin issuers to establish anti-money laundering (AML) compliance programs and granting them authority to freeze or intercept specific transactions.
According to CoinDesk, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Department of Justice jointly filed an application with a federal court on Tuesday evening seeking to block Arizona from enforcing its state gambling laws against prediction market operator Kalshi. The two agencies argue that Kalshi’s contracts—tied to real-world events such as sporting events and elections—are, in substance, financial derivatives (swaps) subject to the Commodity Exchange Act and the federal regulatory framework, rather than state-level gambling regulations. Arizona had previously brought criminal charges against Kalshi, with a trial scheduled for April 13. Courts across the country have issued conflicting rulings: the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (New Jersey) has leaned toward supporting the federal regulatory position, while other district courts have remained open to the state’s arguments.