U.S. Police Association Shifts to Support CLARITY Act
The National Fraternal Order of Police supports the revised CLARITY Act, stating that the new version has alleviated its concerns about limitations on law enforcement powers. x+1
The organization had previously opposed provisions in the bill regarding the regulation of crypto assets, with the core controversy centered on whether it would weaken police authority to track financial crimes. fop+1
This shift in position means that the opposing forces against the bill are further diminishing, with supporters changing the narrative from "regulatory relaxation" to "retaining law enforcement tools." Beneficiaries are the legislative camp pushing for the bill's passage, while those still concerned about AML loopholes are under pressure. globallegalinsights+1
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
The key to the FOP's shift is not "supporting crypto," but rather that it no longer views the CLARITY Act as a legal void that weakens law enforcement. The organization had previously explicitly opposed provisions in the bill that would affect investigative powers, and its change of stance indicates that the lobbying focus has shifted from "can it be regulated" to "how it can be regulated." crypto+1
On the capital path, the most significant change is that the law enforcement system has transformed from an external obstacle into part of the institutional endorsement. If the bill retains developer protections, wallet/infrastructure boundaries, and traceable law enforcement tools, it will reduce compliance costs from "completely uncertain" to "limitedly predictable," which is more favorable for exchanges, stablecoin issuers, and compliance infrastructure. cryptorank+1
Historically, whenever there is a split among U.S. law enforcement agencies regarding crypto legislation, the market usually first prices in that it "won't pass"; once police organizations, professional groups, or regulatory camps begin to accept the revised text, legislative resistance significantly decreases. Similar patterns have repeatedly appeared in securities law, payment regulation, and anti-money laundering issues, where the political narrative of "law enforcement will be weakened" initially prevails, followed by technical revisions leading to institutional support. thefactcoalition+2
Structurally, this represents a transition from regulatory change to industry chain reconstruction: the bill not only defines asset classifications but also rewrites who bears investigative obligations, who receives safe harbor, and who remains within the scope of law enforcement. Those who can write "compliance" into the agreement boundaries will find it easier to gain market access in the next phase. crypto+1
ABAB News · Cognitive Law
Regulation is not a brake; it often reallocates lanes.
When law enforcers nod, the market begins to price.
A true safe harbor first changes the rules, then changes the valuation.