Concerns arise from an anti-human trafficking advocate regarding the Clarity Act, citing potential accountability issues.
By AI Boost|Edited by Jennifer SanasieUpdated Jun 26, 2026, 6:28 p.m. Published Jun 26, 2026, 6:24 p.m. 2 min readMake preferred on ShareShare this articleCopy linkX (Twitter)LinkedInFacebookEmailMake preferred onRecent updates: The Alliance to End Human Trafficking has called on legislators to reconsider Section 604 of the Clarity Act, suggesting that this provision could complicate the accountability of certain crypto platform developers when their technologies are used in human trafficking.
- Katie Boller Gosewisch, the executive director of the Alliance to End Human Trafficking, expressed concerns regarding the wording that indicates developers who do not manage user funds are not classified as money transmitters.
- Boller Gosewisch suggested that this clause might enable some third-party developers to evade responsibility if their software is implicated in payments related to trafficking.
- The Alliance, along with Catholic Charities, recently addressed their worries about the legislation in a letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
- Boller Gosewisch appeared on CoinDesk's The Policy Protocol alongside Rebecca Rettig and Renato Mariotti.
Discussion points: Rettig contended that Section 604 aligns with established U.S. anti-money laundering policies instead of offering a new legal protection.
- Rettig maintained that the clause merely clarifies that developers lacking control over customer assets do not qualify as money transmitters, consistent with the existing guidelines from the Bank Secrecy Act and FinCEN.
- She emphasized that the bill does not remove liability for those who do control user funds and does not negate exposure under other criminal laws.
- Additionally, she referenced existing money laundering regulations, such as 18 U.S.C. § 1956, which can be leveraged by prosecutors against developers who knowingly enable illegal activities.
Key considerations: The conflict lies in whether legislation should be based on current technologies or anticipated future misuse.
- Boller Gosewisch warned that sophisticated criminals might exploit Section 604 to create reasonable doubt in legal prosecutions, even if this is not the current intention of lawmakers.
- Although she admitted she is not a lawyer, she urged Congress to consider how malicious actors might take advantage of the statutory language over time.
- She likened the situation to civil lawsuits involving hotels, arguing that entities might possess a broader "duty of care" even if they do not directly engage in criminal activities.
Looking ahead: Both parties concurred on the necessity for stronger enforcement against human trafficking, despite their differing views on the bill's wording.
- Boller Gosewisch suggested that reinstating a federal human trafficking coordinator and enhancing financial crime prosecutions focused on trafficking would be beneficial alongside legislative changes.
- Rettig argued that blockchain's transparency has become a valuable investigative asset for law enforcement since transactions can often be traced on public ledgers.
- The ongoing conversation regarding developer liability continues as lawmakers deliberate the Clarity Act and as courts evaluate cases involving decentralized crypto protocol developers.
- 1Former Ethereum Foundation leader warns of funding gap as governance shifts22 minutes ago
- 2Virtuals' Jansen Teng says AI agents are evolving into autonomous economic actors56 minutes ago
- 3Securitize expects to raise $400 million as tokenization firm nears public debut3 hours ago
- 4CoinDesk 20 performance update: AAVE jumps 8.9%, leading index higher5 hours ago
- 5Wall Street's IPO revival hasn't reached dot-com euphoria levels, Goldman Sachs says6 hours ago
- 6With crypto ending the first half in the red, bitcoin's solace is it beat Strategy7 hours ago
- 7Bitcoin bounces from $58,000 as derivatives signal more pain in the pipeline7 hours ago
- 8All eyes on Strategy's June 30 ex-dividend date and monthly STRC dividend rate reset8 hours ago
- 9Binance tells EU users it will no longer provide services after failing to secure MiCA license8 hours ago
- 10Ethereum treasury firm Sharplink buys ether for the first time in eight months9 hours ago
Equities on Crypto Rails: A Platform Comparison
Equities on Crypto Rails: A Platform Comparison
US equities on crypto rails: access is easy, on-chain composability is the real test. Only Binance and Backpack deliver both - and only Binance at scale.
By CoinDesk Research9 hours agoUS equities on crypto rails: access is easy, on-chain composability is the real test. Only Binance and Backpack deliver both - and only Binance at scale.
Why it matters:
US equities on crypto rails: access is easy, on-chain composability is the real test. Only Binance and Backpack deliver both - and only Binance at scale.
View Full ReportMore From Policy