New: a trial court in 1 of every 10 U.S. counties. Read the post
Court Rules
All enforcement actions
CoalitionLow RiskMultistate

CT AG Tong Joins Multistate Coalition Opposing Digital Asset Market Clarity Act to Preserve State Crypto Fraud Enforcement Authority

Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (proposed federal legislation — no enforcement target entity)September 14, 2026Connecticut Attorney General

Summary

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong joined a bipartisan coalition of 16 other state attorneys general in sending a letter to the U.S. Senate Banking Committee opposing the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, warning it would preempt state authority to protect investors from cryptocurrency fraud and scams. The coalition urges Congress to preserve state enforcement, registration, and federal-state cooperation roles over digital assets. This is a legislative advocacy action, not an enforcement action — no entity was charged, no violations were found, and no penalty was imposed.

Remedy

No remedies imposed. The press release announces a multistate advocacy letter to Congress opposing proposed legislation; the coalition asks Congress to preserve state enforcement roles for tokenized and non-tokenized securities, preserve federal-state cooperation, codify state crypto registration regimes, and clarify ambiguous language in the bill.

Contract Impact

This is a legislative advocacy action rather than an enforcement action, so it imposes no direct contractual obligations today. However, if the Clarity Act advances, in-house teams at companies with digital-asset exposure — including payment processors, custody providers, exchanges, and investment platforms — should review change-in-law and regulatory-compliance clauses in vendor and customer agreements to address potential SEC preemption of state registration regimes, representations and warranties regarding the legal classification of digital assets as securities, state licensing and registration obligations for crypto platforms, and allocation of liability for fraud or investor-protection compliance failures. Organizations operating in states that signed the letter (CA, NY, NJ, MA, WA, and others) should anticipate continued aggressive state-level crypto enforcement and ensure vendor agreements include cooperation clauses for state AG inquiries and indemnification for regulatory actions arising from digital-asset services.

Contract Search Terms

digital assetcryptocurrency platformstate registration requirementSEC preemptionchange in law clausesecurities classificationregulatory compliance representationcrypto services agreementinvestor protection

Laws Cited

Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (Clarity Act)

Violation Types

Entity Details

Entity

Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (proposed federal legislation — no enforcement target entity)

Industry

Other

Multistate Coalition

Arizona AGCalifornia AGDelaware AGIllinois AGKansas AGMaryland AGMassachusetts AGMichigan AGMinnesota AGNew Jersey AGNew York AGNevada AGOhio AGVirginia AGWashington AGWisconsin AGDistrict of Columbia AG

Official Sources

Source Evidence

Title
"Attorney General Tong Calls on Congress to Preserve States’ Ability to Protect Americans from Cryptocurrency Scams"
Event Date
"09/14/2026"
Event Type
"Attorney General William Tong today joined a bipartisan coalition of 16 other attorneys general in opposing the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (Clarity Act)"
Entity Name
"the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (Clarity Act)"
Laws Cited
"opposing the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (Clarity Act)"
Summary
"The attorneys general caution that as written, the Clarity Act would prevent states from serving as the first line of defense against the escalating epidemic of cryptocurrency fraud."

Related Enforcement Actions

CT

Frontier Communications Parent Inc.

$625K

Connecticut reached a $625,000 settlement with Frontier Communications Parent Inc. over an April 2024 breach in which compromised employee and vendor credentials were used to access internal systems and exfiltrate unencrypted personal information of 58,841 Connecticut residents. The settlement requires Frontier to strengthen its security program, implement specific safeguards and training, and obtain an independent third-party assessment.

CT

Boston Children’s Health Physicians and XTIUM

$2.6M

Connecticut and New York found that Boston Children’s Health Physicians and its security vendor, XTIUM, failed to use reasonable safeguards, resulting in hackers accessing sensitive personal, medical, and employee information. The companies agreed to pay penalties totaling $2.64 million and implement enhanced cybersecurity measures.

CT

Character Technologies, Inc.

Connecticut joined a coalition of state attorneys general filing a notice in Character Technologies, Inc.’s bankruptcy proceedings, raising concerns about the company’s safety and privacy practices and the sensitive information it holds. The states seek protections for children and consumers if the company’s business or assets are sold or transferred; the filing does not impose a fine or other remedy.

CT

Connecticut public utilities

Attorney General William Tong and Consumer Counsel Claire Coleman petitioned PURA to review how Connecticut public utilities use artificial intelligence, citing potential data privacy and cybersecurity risks, algorithmic errors, and misleading outputs. The petition asks PURA to examine utility AI systems, safeguards, vendors, and data security practices; it does not report a finding of violation or an imposed penalty.

CT

RZ Smoke, Inc.

$2.0M

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong announced a settlement with RZ Smoke, Inc. over allegations that it distributed and sold high-potency cannabis products without a state license. The stipulated judgment is $2 million, with $375,000 payable to the State and $1.6 million suspended to ensure compliance; the company is barred from specified cannabis activities in Connecticut unless licensed.

CT

Takeda Pharmaceuticals, U.S.A., Inc.

$13.7M

Connecticut joined a coalition of states and the federal government in settling allegations that Takeda paid healthcare providers speaker honoraria and provided meals to induce prescriptions of Trintellix, leading to allegedly false claims to government healthcare programs. Takeda agreed to pay $13,670,921 plus accrued interest, with portions allocated to federal and state programs.