Democrats Fear Supreme Court May Undermine Crypto Bill Oversight

The immediate crisis stems from a Supreme Court case that could overturn a 90-year-old precedent protecting the independence of federal agency commissioners. This precedent has long been considered a cornerstone of regulatory stability, preventing presidents from removing commissioners except under extraordinary circumstances. Senator Cory Booker expressed “deep concern” at the Court’s recent signals that it is poised to strike down this safeguard, calling it a “massive expansion of presidential power.” He specifically cited fears that President Trump would use this authority to “advantage his friends in a very corrupting way,” undermining the impartial function of agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

This constitutional shift arrives at a pivotal legislative moment. The pending crypto market structure bill would grant the SEC and CFTC “huge powers” in shaping the regulatory landscape for digital assets. The bill’s success hinges on bipartisan trust in these agencies’ ability to operate fairly. However, if the Supreme Court rules as expected, President Trump could theoretically fire any commissioner—including Democrats appointed to secure the bill’s passage—at any future point, rendering any temporary bipartisan balance meaningless. This creates a fundamental paradox for Senate Democrats: they are being asked to empower agencies that may soon lack guaranteed independence from political influence.

Senator Booker has drawn a clear line in the sand, directly linking the fate of the market structure bill to concrete, structural protections for bipartisan oversight. He stated he has “directly made it clear” to the White House that failure to appoint Democratic commissioners to the SEC and CFTC would “undermine our ability” to pass the legislation. Crucially, Booker dismissed the notion that a mere promise from the White House would be sufficient. When asked if such a promise would earn his vote, he replied unequivocally: “No. Oh my god, no.”

This stance highlights the growing rift between Senate Democrats and the Trump administration. The practical reality underscores Booker’s concern: by January, neither the SEC nor the CFTC will have any Democratic commissioners, as the President has resisted nominating any. Mike Selig, the White House’s Republican nominee to lead the CFTC, reinforced this position during his confirmation hearing, stating his belief that “the CFTC is able to function with a single chairman.” This view directly contradicts the legal design of these agencies, which are structured as five-member bodies intended to include two commissioners from the minority party to ensure balanced decision-making.

In response to this looming crisis, Senate Democrats are exploring legislative remedies to embed bipartisan oversight directly into the market structure bill. The primary solution under consideration is inserting language that would require a bipartisan quorum for the SEC and CFTC to function. Such a provision would force the agencies to maintain commissioners from both parties to conduct official business, creating a statutory check against a president’s ability to render them unilateral.

However, the viability of this fix remains highly uncertain. Sources familiar with the negotiations indicate it is “unclear whether the Trump administration would ever accept such a check on its ability to do as it pleases.” The administration’s demonstrated reluctance to appoint minority-party commissioners and its nominee’s testimony suggest strong resistance to any limits on executive control over these agencies. This leaves negotiators like Booker in a difficult position, privately discussing potential remedies with Senate Republicans while publicly stating it would be “counterproductive” to reveal those talks. Despite being “bullish” on the bill’s ultimate passage, Booker acknowledges that the commissioner issue has become a “growing thorn in the side” of Senate Democrats, threatening to stall a legislative package that many in the crypto industry see as critical for clarity and growth.