Svmuu News: Patrick Witt, the White House’s cryptocurrency advisor, posted on X stating that Democratic opposition to the ethics provisions in the CLARITY Act appears to take two main forms: (1) If the ethics provisions cannot be enforced by state attorneys general, then they are meaningless;(2) If the ethics provisions do not hold President Donald Trump accountable for his prior involvement in the cryptocurrency industry, then these provisions are unacceptable.
Patrick Witt noted that if you support view (1), you are effectively arguing that all existing federal ethics laws are meaningless, since none of these laws can currently be enforced by state attorneys general.If you support view (2), then in reality no measure can meet your requirements, because the approach you advocate clearly violates the Constitution (see Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution).