Katherine Kirkpatrick Bos, Head of Legal at Chainlink, offered a stark assessment of the Clarity Act’s prospects after the House canceled the final two weeks of its September legislative schedule.
“Devastating for Clarity”
She called the development “very frustrating” for the many market participants who had pushed hard for the legislation, describing it as “the ultimate way to futureproof all of the good work that’s being done.”
Why Legislation Matters More Than Guidance
Kirkpatrick Bos argued that regulatory guidance from agencies, however well-intentioned, isn’t a substitute for an actual law. “We’ve heard future proof again and again from both the CFTC and the SEC,” she said, “but the three of us definitely know that the best way you future proof things is legislation, because it’s very difficult to amend or to undo legislation. It’s much easier to change rulemaking or guidance, which is a lot of what we’re seeing now.”
She said she’s encouraged that financial regulators are moving quickly to fill the current legislative gap. “I am happy to see our financial regulators moving quickly to fill this legislative gap and to provide clarity, to provide guidance,” she said.
Her Real Concern: Can Guidance Hold?
Despite that, Kirkpatrick Bos said her underlying worry is durability. “My only concern as a scenario in two and a half years, what can we do to cement that guidance?” she asked. Her proposed answer centers on broader participation from established financial players.
“The best tactic, the best way we can really underscore the seriousness of providing that legal clarity that should not be undone, is getting more people at the table,” she said. “The more that we are embedded with TradFi, the more sophisticated large institutions are part of the discussion and part of the engagement, the harder it’s going to be to undo all of this.”
