The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of the United States is faced with increasing criticisms on the part of current and old officials concerning its evolutionary position on the services of putting in the lookout for cryptography.
On May 29, the finance division of the SEC Societies issued new advice on the punishment of cryptography Services, saying that certain offers may not constitute titles and effectively exempt blockchains of proof of registration requirements under the securities law.
However, the new interpretation of the SEC can diverge from several decisions of the Federal Court, according to the former head of the DRI Internet application, John Reed Stark.
In a declaration on X, Stark supported The latest move of the Commission contradicts the judicial conclusions in large -scale affairs against Binance and Coinbase cryptographic exchanges, where judges have previously granted allegations according to which the setback of qualified products as titles under long -standing legal preceding.
“This is how the SEC dies – in sight,” wrote Stark in a long response to the agency, calling the quarter of work “a shameful abdication of its investor protection mission”.
As for the Binance, while the SEC allegedly alleged that the birth services of the exchange constituted offers of non -registered securities, the case was ultimately Rejected with prejudice in May 2025preventing the agency from submitting similar complaints. Likewise, in March 2024, a federal judge As much as the case of the agency against Coinbase continuesindicating that the SEC had “pleaded” enough for the ignition program to involve the unregistered offer and the sale of securities. The case was also rejected in February 2025 as part of a broader change in the CRS approach to cryptographic regulations.
The in -office commissioner, Caroline Crenshaw, also published a statement on May 29 in response to the agency’s approach in terms of cryptographic development, warning Whether the staff’s conclusions did not eat with established case law or the Howey test.
“Staff analysis can reflect what some people want the law to be, but it does not lie down with the court decisions on the development and the precedent for a long time on which it is based,” wrote Crenshaw, adding that:
“This is another example of the ongoing approach to the False sec ‘until we are’ ‘of the crypto – taking measures based on the anticipation of future changes while ignoring the existing law.”
The Commission recently undertook a series of deregular stages on digital assets, including the end of surveys, the abolition of proceedings and the launch of round tables to discuss the regulations with the participants in the industry.
“This cryptocurrency blitzkrieg,” wrote Stark, “destroyed a 90-year-old heritage.”
In relation: Crenshaw Screns Slams Ripple Settlement, warns against the “regulatory vacuum”
Although the SEC has supervised its recent actions in the context of an effort to provide regulatory clarity, criticism argues that the result was still confusion.
In a declaration of June 2, Crenshaw questioned The coherence of the approach of the commission, pointing to cases where the agency seemed to treat certain digital assets, such as ether (ETH) and Solana tokens (soil), as titles.
“How is it that these cryptographic assets are not titles with regard to registration requirements, but are conveniently titles when a registration sees an opportunity to sell a new product?” Said Crenshaw.
Speaking during the Bitcoin 2025 conference in Las Vegas, Nevada, Commissioner Hester Peirce rejected against criticism From the new interpretation of the agency on the crypto, noting that the classification of a transaction in securities depends more on the nature of the agreement than on the asset itself:
“Most cryptographic assets, as we see them today, are probably not themselves titles.
Review: Risk of deposit: What really does crypto exchanges do with your money?