Hoskinson calls out Trump’s crypto team: If they don't push the CLARITY Act in Q1, they should step down

Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson recently publicly questioned the enforcement of the Trump administration’s crypto policies during an interview, stating that if key legislation cannot be passed this quarter, government crypto affairs head David Sacks should resign. These remarks reflect the industry’s deep anxiety over policy progress and expose the current regulatory dilemmas faced by the sector.

Core Issue: Why is the CLARITY Act so important?

Significance of the Act

The CLARITY Act (Digital Asset Market Clarity Act) is regarded within the industry as a crucial step toward establishing the U.S. crypto regulatory framework. Its core value lies in providing clear regulatory definitions and rules for the cryptocurrency market, which is vital for the development of industry participants, investors, and the ecosystem as a whole.

According to recent reports, several institutions are already advancing ETF applications for crypto assets—including Grayscale’s spot ADA ETF, ProShares’ CoinDesk Crypto 20 ETF, and others—these initiatives all require a clear regulatory framework as support. Without the legal certainty provided by the CLARITY Act, the progress of these financial products faces uncertainty.

Hoskinson’s Main Criticism

Hoskinson pointed out that since Sacks took on the role of crypto affairs head at the end of 2024, the industry has faced three major issues:

• Continuous decline in cryptocurrency prices, leading to diminished market confidence
• Lack of clarity in the regulatory framework, leaving companies and investors at a loss
• Failure to establish a solid foundation for development

He further criticized the current U.S. crypto policy for structural biases: favoring large financial institutions like BlackRock, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley, rather than retail investors and innovative projects. This policy orientation has led to industry centralization on Wall Street, contradicting the original decentralized ethos of cryptocurrencies.

Political Uncertainty: Risks to Legislation Passage

Hoskinson’s concerns are well-founded. The advancement of the CLARITY Act faces at least two key risks:

Short-term risk: Whether the bill can pass in Q1 2026 is a critical juncture. Missing this window would mean the industry continues to face regulatory uncertainty.

Mid-term risk: Hoskinson specifically mentioned that if the Democrats regain control of the House in the November midterm elections, the bill will become even harder to push forward. This indicates that changes in the political landscape could drastically alter the trajectory of crypto policy development.

Additionally, Hoskinson criticized Trump-related crypto projects (such as the “Official Trump” meme coin) for causing market confusion and potentially fueling anti-crypto political movements, further worsening the policy environment.

Industry Status: A Critical Moment Requiring Policy Support

Recent developments show that the crypto industry is pushing for institutional applications and compliance across multiple dimensions:

• Google Cloud joining the Cardano testnet, marking validation of enterprise-level infrastructure
• Several institutions advancing crypto asset ETF applications, seeking compliance to enter mainstream financial markets
• Countries like South Korea beginning to allow institutional investors to allocate crypto assets, signaling policy friendliness

All these progress points require support from U.S. policy. Without a clear regulatory framework, the industry’s global competitiveness could be compromised.

Personal View: The Practical Dilemma of Policy Advancement

Hoskinson’s remarks, though radical, reflect genuine industry anxiety. In reality, the push for the CLARITY Act faces dual pressures of politics and time. With less than three months until Q1, advancing an important bill in the U.S. Congress is no easy task.

He advocates that the U.S. should develop “lasting and innovation-friendly crypto regulations, even if it takes longer,” reflecting a desire for policy stability and long-term planning. For the industry, it’s more important to establish a stable, clear, and not overly restrictive regulatory framework than to rush through a flawed bill.

Summary

Hoskinson’s public pressure highlights the crypto industry’s anxiety over policy progress and dissatisfaction with current policy enforcement. Whether the CLARITY Act can pass in Q1 will directly impact regulatory certainty and the sector’s development prospects. This is not only a political test for the Trump administration but also a critical moment for the crypto industry to secure compliant growth space.

Future focus should be on the actual progress of the CLARITY Act, whether political changes will affect policy priorities, and whether the industry can self-improve through technological innovation and institutional cooperation before the policy framework is established. While policy uncertainty may persist long-term, the industry’s development pace will not halt because of it.