Hoskinson Slaps Down Garlinghouse's Crypto Bill Betrayal?

The crypto industry's most heated debate erupted over the weekend as Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson unleashed a blistering attack on Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse and the proposed CLARITY Act. The confrontation exposes deep fractures within crypto leadership over how to approach regulatory frameworks.

Hoskinson's fierce stance against compromise contrasts sharply with Garlinghouse's pragmatic approach, setting up a philosophical battle that could shape the industry's regulatory future. The dispute centers on whether imperfect legislation is better than continued uncertainty.

You might also like: Armstrong Reverses Course: CLARITY Act Back On Table

Hoskinson's Fiery Rejection of Compromise

According to Coin Bureau on X, Hoskinson delivered a scathing Sunday rant targeting both Garlinghouse and the draft CLARITY Act legislation.

And you still got people like Brad saying, well, it's not perfect, but we just got to get something, you know? It's better than no clarity. Hand it to the same people who sued us, handed to the same people who put us out of business, who subpoenaed us, who put us in jail. That's better. That's what we fought for.

The Cardano founder questioned whether the industry should accept legislation that grants authority to the same entities that previously targeted crypto companies. Hoskinson emphasized that once passed, such legislation becomes nearly impossible to change, citing the Securities Exchange Act of 1933 as an example of regulatory permanence.

His most explosive statement challenged the fundamental direction of crypto's regulatory push, declaring he didn't sign up to hand the revolution to 15 banks or accept a world of custodial wallets, mandatory KYC transactions, and reversible payments.

Must read: Armstrong Denies White House Fury Over CLARITY Clash

Garlinghouse Champions Pragmatic Progress

The controversy began when Garlinghouse spoke at the St. Moritz event, as reported by The Crypto Squire on X, advocating for the pending market structure bill despite its imperfections.

Clarity is always better than chaos. And the industry needs clarity. Perfection, I think, in my experience. Is the market structure bill that's pending in the Banking Committee, is it perfect? No, certainly not. But is it better than nothing? Absolutely.

The Ripple CEO argued that getting legislation passed provides a foundation for iterative improvements through continued work with Washington. His position reflects a belief that regulatory certainty, even if flawed, beats ongoing legal ambiguity for businesses trying to operate in the space.

This philosophical divide highlights contrasting strategies: Garlinghouse's incremental approach versus Hoskinson's demand for comprehensive reform that upholds crypto's original principles of decentralization and financial freedom.

The debate raises critical questions about whether the crypto industry should accept regulatory frameworks that may preserve traditional financial structures rather than transform them. With major figures publicly disagreeing, the path forward remains uncertain as Washington considers legislation that could define crypto's future for decades.

---

3 Key Takeaways:

1. Hoskinson rejects CLARITY Act compromise, warning it surrenders crypto's revolution to traditional banks
2. Garlinghouse argues imperfect regulatory clarity beats continued uncertainty for the crypto industry
3. The public dispute exposes deep philosophical divides between major crypto leaders on regulatory strategy

---