Connect with us

Published

on

This article was featured in One Story to Read Today, a newsletter in which our editors recommend a single must-read from The Atlantic, Monday through Friday. Sign up for it here.

For more than half a century, I have been studying the shifting relations between white and Black Americans. My first journal article, published in 1972, when I was a graduate student at the University of Chicago, was about Black political power in the industrial Midwest after the riots of the late 1960s. My own experience of race relations in America is even longer. I was born in the Mississippi Delta during World War II, in a cabin on what used to be a plantation, and then moved as a young boy to northern Indiana, where as a Black person in the early 1950s, I was constantly reminded of my place, and of the penalties for overstepping it. Seeing the image of Emmett Tills dead body in Jet magazine in 1955 brought home vividly for my generation of Black kids that the consequences of failing to navigate carefully among white people could even be lethal.Explore the November 2023 Issue

Check out more from this issue and find your next story to read.View More

For the past 16 years, I have been on the faculty of the sociology department at Yale, and in 2018 I was granted a Sterling Professorship, the highest academic rank the university bestows. I say this not to boast, but to illustrate that I have made my way from the bottom of American society to the top, from a sharecroppers cabin to the pinnacle of the ivory tower. One might think that, as a decorated professor at an Ivy League university, I would have escaped the various indignities that being Black in traditionally white spaces exposes you to. And to be sure, I enjoy many of the privileges my white professional-class peers do. But the Black ghettoa destitute and fearsome place in the popular imagination, though in reality it is home to legions of decent, hardworking familiesremains so powerful that it attaches to all Black Americans, no matter where and how they live. Regardless of their wealth or professional status or years of law-abiding bourgeois decency, Black people simply cannot escape what I call the iconic ghetto.

I know I havent. Some years ago, I spent two weeks in Wellfleet, Massachusetts, a pleasant Cape Cod town full of upper-middle-class white vacationers and working-class white year-rounders. On my daily jog one morning, a white man in a pickup truck stopped in the middle of the road, yelling and gesticulating. Go home! he shouted.

Who was this man? Did he assume, because of my Black skin, that I was from the ghetto? Is that where he wanted me to go home to?

From the May 1994 issue: Elijah Anderson on the code of the streets

This was not an isolated incident. When I jog through upscale white neighborhoods near my home in Connecticut, white people tense upunless I wear my Yale or University of Pennsylvania sweatshirts. When my jogging outfit associates me with an Ivy League university, it identifies me as a certain kind of Black person: a less scary one who has passed inspection under the white gaze. Strangers with dark skin are suspect until they can prove their trustworthiness, which is hard to do in fleeting public interactions. For this reason, Black students attending universities near inner cities know to wear college apparel, in hopes of avoiding racial profiling by the police or others.

I once accidentally ran a small social experiment about this. When I joined the Yale faculty in 2007, I bought about 20 university baseball caps to give to the young people at my family reunion that year. Later, my nieces and nephews reported to me that wearing the Yale insignia had transformed their casual interactions with white strangers: White people would now approach them to engage in friendly small talk.When I jog through upscale white neighborhoods near my home, white people tense upunless I wear my Yale or Penn sweatshirt.

But sometimes these signifiers of professional status and educated-class propriety are not enough. This can be true even in the most rarefied spaces. When I was hired at Yale, the chair of the sociology department invited me for dinner at the Yale Club of New York City. Clad in a blue blazer, I got to the club early and decided to go up to the fourth-floor library to read The New York Times. When the elevator arrived, a crush of people was waiting to get on it, so I entered and moved to the back to make room for others. Everyone except me was white.

As the car filled up, I politely asked a man of about 35, standing by the controls, to push the button for the library floor. He looked at me andemboldened, I have to imagine, by drinks in the bar downstairssaid, You can read? The car fell silent. After a few tense moments, another man, seeking to defuse the tension, blurted, Ive never met a Yalie who couldnt read. All eyes turned to me. The car reached the fourth floor. I stepped off, held the door open, and turned back to the people in the elevator. Im not a Yalie, I said. Im a new Yale professor. And I went into the library to read the paper.

I tell these stories and Ive told them beforenot to fault any particular institution (Ive treasured my time at Yale), but to illustrate my personal experience of a recurring cultural phenomenon: Throughout American history, every moment of significant Black advancement has been met by a white backlash. After the Civil War, under the aegis of Reconstruction, Black people for a time became professionals and congressmen. But when federal troops left the former Confederate states in 1877, white politicians in the South tried to reconstitute slavery with the long rule of Jim Crow. Even the Black people who migrated north to escape this new servitude found themselves relegated to shantytowns on the edges of cities, precursors to the modern Black ghetto.

All of this reinforced what slavery had originally established: the Black bodys place at the bottom of the social order. This racist positioning became institutionalized in innumerable ways, and it persists today.

I want to emphasize that across the decades, many white Americans have encouraged racial equality, albeit sometimes under duress. In response to the riots of the 1960s, the federal governmentled by the former segregationist Lyndon B. Johnsonpassed far-reaching legislation that finally extended the full rights of citizenship to Black people, while targeting segregation. These legislative reformsand, especially, affirmative action, which was implemented via LBJs executive order in 1965combined with years of economic expansion to produce a long period of what I call racial incorporation, which substantially elevated the income of many Black people and brought them into previously white spaces. Yes, a lot of affirmative-action efforts stopped at mere tokenism. Even so, many of these tokens managed to succeed, and the result is the largest Black middle class in American history.To survive in white workplaces, Black newcomers must perform an elaborate dance in which they demonstrate their distance from the ghetto.

Over the past 50 years, according to a study by the Pew Research Center, the proportion of Black people who are low-income (less than $52,000 a year for a household of three) has fallen seven points, from 48 to 41 percent. The proportion who are middle-income ($52,000 to $156,000 a year) has risen by one point, to 47 percent. The proportion who are high-income (more than $156,000 a year) has risen the most dramatically, from 5 to 12 percent. Overall, Black poverty remains egregiously disproportionate to that of white and Asian Americans. But fewer Black Americans are poor than 50 years ago, and more than twice as many are rich. Substantial numbers now attend the best schools, pursue professions of their choosing, and occupy positions of power and prestige. Affirmative action worked.

But that very success has inflamed the inevitable white backlash. Notably, the only racial group more likely to be low-income now than 50 years ago is whitesand the only group less likely to be low-income is Black.

Read: Five decades of white backlash

For some white people displaced from their jobs by globalization and deindustrialization, the successful Black person with a good job is the embodiment of whats wrong with America. The spectacle of Black doctors, CEOs, and college professors out of their place creates an uncomfortable dissonance, which white people deal with by mentally relegating successful Black people to the ghetto. That Black man who drives a new Lexus and sends his children to private schoolhe must be a drug kingpin, right?

In predominantly white professional spaces, this racial anxiety appears in subtler ways. Black people are all too familiar with a particular kind of interaction, in the guise of a casual watercooler conversation, the gist of which is a sort of interrogation: Where did you come from?; How did you get here?; and Are you qualified to be here? (The presumptive answer to the last question is clearly no; Black skin, evoking for white people the iconic ghetto, confers an automatic deficit of credibility.)

Black newcomers must signal quickly and clearly that they belong. Sometimes this requires something as simple as showing a company ID that white people are not asked for. Other times, a more elaborate dance is required, a performance in which the worker must demonstrate their propriety, their distance from the ghetto. This can involve dressing more formally than the job requires, speaking in a self-consciously educated way, and evincing a placid demeanor, especially in moments of disagreement.

From the November 2018 issue: The personal cost of Black success

As part of my ethnographic research, I once embedded in a major financial-services corporation in Philadelphia, where I spent six months observing and interviewing workers. One Black employee I spoke with, a senior vice president, said that people of color who wanted to climb the management ladder must wear the right uniform and work hard to perform respectability. Theyre never going to envision you as being a white male, he told me, but if you can dress the same and look a certain way and drive a conservative car and whatever else, theyll say, This guy has a similar attitude, similar values [to we white people]. Hes a team player. If you dont dress with the uniform, obviously youre on the wrong team.

This need to constantly perform respectability for white people is a psychological drain, leaving Black people spent and demoralized. They typically keep this demoralization hidden from their white co-workers because they feel that they need to show they are not whiners. Having to pay a Black tax as they move through white areas deepens this demoralization. This tax is levied on people of color in nice restaurants and other public places, or simply while driving, when the fear of a lethal encounter with the police must always be in mind. The existential danger this kind of encounter poses is what necessitates The Talk that Black parentsfearful every time their kids go out the door that they might not come back alivegive to their children. The psychological effects of all of this accumulate gradually, sapping the spirit and engendering cynicism.

Even the most exalted members of the Black elite must live in two worlds. They understand the white elites mores and values, and embody them to a substantial extentbut they typically remain keenly conscious of their Blackness. They socialize with both white and Black people of their own professional standing, but also members of the Black middle and working classes with whom they feel more kinship, meeting them at the barbershop, in church, or at gatherings of long-standing friendship groups. The two worlds seldom overlap. This calls to mind W. E. B. Du Bois double consciousnessa term he used for the first time in this publication, in 1897referring to the dual cultural mindsets that successful African Americans must simultaneously inhabit.

From the August 1897 issue: W. E. B. Du Bois Strivings of the Negro People

For middle-class Black people, a certain fluidityabetted by family connectionsenables them to feel a connection with those at the lower reaches of society. But that connection comes with a risk of contagion; they fear that, meritocratic status notwithstanding, they may be dragged down by their association with the hood.

When I worked at the University of Pennsylvania, some friends of mine and I mentored at-risk youth in West Philadelphia.

One of these kids, Kevin Robinson, who goes by KAYR (pronounced K.R.), grew up with six siblings in a single-parent household on public assistance. Two of his sisters got pregnant as teenagers, and for a while the whole family was homeless. But he did well in high school and was accepted to Bowdoin College, where he was one of five African Americans in a class of 440. He was then accepted to Dartmouths Tuck School of Business, where he was one of 10 or so African Americans in an M.B.A. class of roughly 180. He got into the analyst-training program at Goldman Sachs, where his cohort of 300 had five African Americans. And from there he ended up at a hedge fund, where he was the lone Black employee.

Whats striking about Robinsons accomplishments is not just the steepness of his rise or the scantness of Black peers as he climbed, but the extent of cultural assimilation he felt he needed to achieve in order to fit in. He trimmed his Afro. He did a pre-college program before starting Bowdoin, where he had sushi for the first time and learned how to play tennis and golf. Let me look at how these people live; let me see how they operate, he recalls saying to himself. He decided to start reading The New Yorker and Time magazine, as they did, and to watch 60 Minutes. I wanted people to see me more as their peer versus someone from the hood. I wanted them to see me as, like, Hey, look, hes just another middle-class Black kid.? When he was about to start at Goldman Sachs, a Latina woman who was mentoring him there told him not to wear a silver watch or prominent jewelry: ?KAYR, go get a Timex with a black leather band. Keep it very simple Fit in.? My friends and I had given him similar advice earlier on.

All of this worked; he thrived professionally. Yet even as he occupied elite precincts of wealth and achievement, he was continually getting pulled back to support family in the ghetto, where he felt the need to code-switch, speaking and eating the ways his family did so as not to insult them.

The year he entered Bowdoin, one of his younger brothers was sent to prison for attempted murder, and a sister who had four children was shot in the face and died. Over the years he would pay for school supplies for his nieces and nephews, and for multiple family funeralsall while keeping his family background a secret from his professional colleagues. Even so, he would get subjected to the standard indignitiesbeing asked to show ID when his white peers were not; enduring the (sometimes obliviously) racist comments from colleagues (You dont act like a regular Black). He would report egregious offenses to HR but would usually just let things go, for fear that developing a reputation as a race guy would restrict his professional advancement.

Robinsons is a remarkable success story. He is 40 now; he owns a property-management company and is a multimillionaire. But his experience makes clear that no matter what professional or financial heights you ascend to, if you are Black, you can never escape the iconic ghetto, and sometimes not even the actual one.

The most egregious intrusion of a Black person into white space was the election (and reelection) of Barack Obama as president. A Black man in the White House! For some white people, this was intolerable. Birthers, led by Donald Trump, said he was ineligible for the presidency, claiming falsely that he had been born in Kenya. The white backlash intensified; Republicans opposed Obama with more than the standard amount of partisan vigor. In 2013, at the beginning of Obamas second term, the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, which ad protected the franchise for 50 years. Encouraged by this opening, Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Texas moved forward with voter-suppression laws, setting a course that other states are now following. And this year, the Supreme Court outlawed affirmative action in college admissions. I want to tell a story that illustrates the social gains this puts at risk.

Many years ago, when I was a professor at Penn, my father came to visit me. Walking around campus, we bumped into various colleagues and students of mine, most of them white, who greeted us warmly. He watched me interact with my secretary and other department administrators. Afterward, Dad and I went back to my house to drink beer and listen to Muddy Waters.

So youre teaching at that white school? he said.

Yeah.

You work with white people. And you teach white students.

Yeah, but they actually come in all colors, I responded. I got his point, though.

Well, let me ask you one thing, he said, furrowing his brow.

Whats that, Dad?

Do they respect you?

After thinking about his question a bit, I said, Well, some do. And some dont. But you know, Dad, it is hard to tell which is which sometimes.

Oh, I see, he said.

He didnt disbelieve me; it was just that what hed witnessed on campus was at odds with his experience of the typical Black-white interaction, where the subordinate status of the Black person was automatically assumed by the white one. Growing up in the South, my dad understood that white people simply did not respect Black people. Observing the respectful treatment I received from my students and colleagues, my father had a hard time believing his own eyes. Could race relations have changed so much, so fast?

Read: A 1999 interview with Elijah Anderson on his book Code of the Street

They hadin large part because of what affirmative action, and the general processes of racial incorporation and Black economic improvement, had wrought. In the 1960s, the only Black people at the financial-services firm I studied would have been janitors, night watchmen, elevator operators, or secretaries; 30 years later, affirmative action had helped populate the firm with Black executives. Each beneficiary of affirmative action, each member of the growing Black middle class, helped normalize the presence of Black people in professional and other historically white spaces. All of this diminished, in some incremental way, the power of the symbolic ghetto to hold back people of color.

Too many people forget, if ever they knew it, what a profound cultural shift affirmative action effected. And they overlook affirmative actions crucial role in forestalling social unrest.

Some years ago, I was invited to the College of the Atlantic, a small school in Maine, to give the commencement address. As I stood at the sink in the mens room before the event, checking the mirror to make sure all my academic regalia was properly arrayed, an older white man came up to me and said, with no preamble, What do you think of affirmative action?

I think its a form of reparations, I said.

Well, I think they need to be educated first, he said, and then walked out.

I was so provoked by this that I scrambled back to my hotel room and rewrote my speech. Id already been planning to talk about the benefits of affirmative action, but I sharpened and expanded my case, explaining that it not only had lifted many Black people out of the ghetto, but had been a weapon in the Cold War, when unaligned countries and former colonies were trying to decide which superpower to follow. Back then, Democrats and some Republicans were united in believing that affirmative action, by demonstrating the countrys commitment to racial justice and equality, helped project American greatness to the world.

Beyond that, I said to this almost entirely white audience, affirmative action had helped keep the racial unrest of the 60s from flaring up again. When the kinthe mothers, fathers, cousins, nephews, sons, daughters, baby mamas, uncles, auntsof ghetto residents secure middle-class livelihoods, those ghetto relatives hear about it. This gives the young people who live there a modicum of hope that they might do the same. Hope takes the edge off distress and desperation; it lessens the incentives for people to loot and burn. What opponents of affirmative action fail to understand is that without a ladder of upward mobility for Black Americans, and a general sense that justice will prevail, a powerful nurturer of social concord gets lost.

Yes, continuing to expand the Black professional and middle classes will lead to more instances of the dance, and the loaded interrogations, and the other awkward moments and indignities that people of color experience in white spaces. But the greater the number of affluent, successful Black people in such places, the faster this awkwardness will diminish, and the less power the recurrent waves of white reaction will have to set people of color back. I would like to believe that future generations of Black Americans will someday find themselves as pleasantly surprised as my dad once was by the new levels of racial respect and equality they discover.

This article appears in the November 2023 print edition with the headline Black Success, White Backlash.

Continue Reading

World

US-Ukraine deal no longer looks like gangsters running a protection racket – but Trump could still end military support

Published

on

By

US-Ukraine deal no longer looks like gangsters running a protection racket - but Trump could still end military support

This is a significant moment in this war.

It strengthens ties between Ukraine and the US which have been fraying to the point of disintegration.

But will it increase the chances of a diplomatic breakthrough to find peace? Possibly not. Without that, this agreement will have changed little in this pointless grinding war.

But it does give Donald Trump a personal political investment in a conflict he has always seemed to have regarded as someone else’s fault, someone else’s problem and a money pit for US resources.

On the face of it, it is a purely economic agreement.

Ukraine had wanted to tie in explicit guarantees of continuing US military support. The details are scant but they appear to be absent.

But reaching agreement is a considerable diplomatic achievement on both sides.

More from World

The negotiations have been painful.

Ukraine war latest: Follow live updates

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump and Zelenskyy – it’s complicated?

The idea of a minerals deal was initially proposed by President Zelenskyy but at times he must have regretted it as acrimonious talks threatened to torpedo US support for Ukraine entirely.

It was meant to have been signed in February before the infamous Zelenskyy-Trump-Vance bust up in the Oval Office.

At one point it looked like an act of extortion. Like gangsters running a protection racket, the US seemed to be demanding all Ukraine’s mineral wealth in return for continued support.

But the terms now look less onerous. Most importantly it seems the Trump administration is not asking retrospectively for the return of billions given by the Biden administration, by means of this minerals extraction agreement.

The turning point in negotiations appears to have been the meeting engineered between Mr Trump and Mr Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the Pope’s funeral in Rome on Saturday. Mr Zelenskyy appears to have persuaded Mr Trump it was a deal worth signing.

Read more:
Key moments that have shaped Trump and Zelenskyy relationship
Tesla’s board members ‘start looking for Musk’s successor’
What the White House has said about minerals deal

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

From February: Watch Trump and Zelenskyy clash

The terms are vague and not detailed but the agreement appears to be more of a long term proposal for joint cooperation over Ukraine’s economic future.

America will invest in exploiting Ukraine’s mineral wealth but also share the profits years down the line.

The signing comes at a crucial time for Ukraine. Its forces are losing ground on the battlefield. And Mr Trump’s efforts to broker peace look decidedly one-sided against them.

Falling in line on this deal was essential for Ukrainians. Whether it saves them from President Trump walking away and ending military support for them anyway, is by no means certain.

Continue Reading

Politics

Morgan Stanley eyes crypto rollout for E*Trade platform: Bloomberg

Published

on

By

Morgan Stanley eyes crypto rollout for E*Trade platform: Bloomberg

Morgan Stanley eyes crypto rollout for E*Trade platform: Bloomberg

Banking giant Morgan Stanley reportedly plans to list cryptocurrencies on its E*Trade investment brokerage and trading platform.

According to a May 1 Bloomberg report, the firm intends to list crypto assets on E*Trade in 2026. The plan is still in early development, and the bank is said to be exploring partnerships with established crypto firms to power the service. Internal discussions about cryptocurrency support reportedly began in late 2024.

Banking, Banks, Cryptocurrency Exchange, Morgan Stanley
E*Trade homepage. Source: E*Trade

This would not be Morgan Stanley’s first exposure to digital assets. The bank’s wealthiest clients have had access to crypto exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and futures for some time, with the firm’s advisers allowed to pitch Bitcoin ETFs since August 2024.

Related: Morgan Stanley to explore crypto offerings for clients — CEO

Regulatory tailwinds push crypto forward

The news follows previous reports that Morgan Stanley was considering adding cryptocurrency trading to its E*Trade online brokerage platform in early January. The reports at the time cited the expectations of a friendlier crypto regulatory environment.

The move comes amid an increasingly favorable regulatory environment in the United States following the election of President Donald Trump, who campaigned on a pro-crypto platform and is personally involved in several blockchain ventures.

Related: Morgan Stanley discloses $188M in BlackRock Bitcoin ETF holdings

The first 30 days of the Trump administration brought significant changes to the local crypto industry. More recently, US crypto proponents have shown optimism following the swearing-in of pro-crypto Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins.

The SEC had significantly changed its stance even before Atkins took office. In late February, the agency had already paused multiple cryptocurrency enforcement cases with imminent deadlines.

This is a developing story, and further information will be added as it becomes available.

Magazine: ZK-proofs are bringing smart contracts to Bitcoin — BitcoinOS and Starknet

Continue Reading

Environment

Trump rewrites crypto rules in first 100 days, industry celebrates ‘180 pivot’ from Biden years

Published

on

By

Trump rewrites crypto rules in first 100 days, industry celebrates '180 pivot' from Biden years

People walk past an advertisement feature Donald Trump with Bitcoin in Hong Kong. 

May James | Lightrocket | Getty Images

As President Donald Trump hit the 100-day mark this week for his second term in office, his approval numbers were lower than for any administration at this point in over seven decades.

Don’t tell that to the crypto community.

Trump ran for office on a promise to make America “the crypto capital of the world.” Those who got behind that message say he’s already delivered, or at least gotten off to a hot start.

A blitz of executive actions, strategic appointments, and early wins, from the creation of a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve to the rollback of enforcement-heavy SEC tactics, has left the industry feeling more welcome in Washington, D.C., than ever.

“Every single appointment — I’m happy with from a crypto perspective,” said Nic Carter, founding partner at Castle Island Ventures. “The previous financial regulatory apparatus was dead set against crypto, and now it’s been a total 180 compared to that.”

President Trump faced early blowback after proposing the possibility of a strategic crypto reserve that would go beyond bitcoin and include other digital currencies like etherXRP,  Solana’s SOL token and Cardano’s ADA. Skeptics said taxpayer dollars shouldn’t be spent on such risky assets. The president soon narrowed the plan to focus solely on bitcoin and made clear he wouldn’t use taxpayer funds to support a government buying strategy.

He’s also been criticized by some for launching a meme coin that’s added billions of dollars in paper wealth to his net worth. The $TRUMP token surged earlier this month after its website announced that top holders would be invited to a private dinner with the president. His family is also involved in other crypto projects.

Exodus legal chief discusses SEC's first crypto roundtable under new Chair Paul Atkins

“It doesn’t really help to have members of his family do encrypted projects of their own,” Carter said. “I understand that they are interested in the industry and want to engage with it, but the optics are not that favorable around that.”

But for the most part, that behavior is being ignored as the crypto industry prefers to focus its attention elsewhere even as the president’s job approval broadly sits at just 43%, according to an average of recent national polls.

At the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Jonathan Gould has signaled support for issuing new bank charters to crypto firms. During President Joe Biden’s presidency, that was almost unthinkable.

“We’ll see a lot of new crypto firms getting bank charters,” Carter said. “And new banks getting set up that are expressively focused on crypto and stablecoins.”

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, under interim chair Travis Hill, is also making moves. Crypto fans have applauded his efforts to expose what industry insiders call “Choke Point 2.0,” an alleged coordinated effort by regulators during the Biden presidency to pressure banks into severing ties with crypto.

Paul Atkins, the new chair of the SEC, represents a stark contrast to predecessor Gary Gensler, who was a notorious hardliner when it came to crypto regulations and enforcement. Carter said the SEC under Atkins has already begun working directly with crypto stakeholders, including Castle Island, to craft guidance on token issuance and the line between securities and commodities.

“This is the clarity we’ve been asking for,” Carter said. “Even barring a legislative solution, I think the SEC is going to come out with real guidance around tokens and how a domestic crypto firm can operate.”

Atkins made his first public appearance just four days into the job by opening a crypto roundtable — a move that sent a clear signal to industry participants. Last week, Atkins hosted a half-day session at SEC headquarters in Washington, D.C., focused on crypto innovation and custody. The event took place weeks after the regulator formally dropped its long-running lawsuit against Ripple, a symbolic end to a four-year battle between the SEC and the crypto industry. 

Read more about tech and crypto from CNBC Pro

Veronica McGregor, the chief legal officer of Exodus and a participant in the SEC’s crypto roundtable, echoed Carter’s sentiment in calling the approach a “180 pivot.”

“Just having the roundtables are kind of surprising and refreshing,” said McGregor, who contributed to the political advocacy group Stand With Crypto during the 2024 campaign. “Given that we have an administration that is touting itself as pro-crypto and making some changes that need to be made, I would say those donations were strategically placed and are paying off.”

Waiting on the Fed

Trump has tapped Brian Quintenz, currently policy chief for the crypto group at venture firm Andreessen Horowitz, to lead the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Carter cautioned that the Federal Reserve remains a “structural holdout.” While banks can now custody crypto, thanks to the repeal of an accounting rule called SAB 121, they still can’t work directly with crypto firms “unless the Fed says they can,” Carter said.

The FDIC and OCC have rescinded their anti-crypto guidance, but the Federal Reserve has only partially followed suit. A notice from Jan. 2023 continues to restrict banks from certain crypto-related activities.

“The Fed is still the blocker for banks to deal with stablecoins for crypto,” Carter said.

Brian Armstrong, CEO of Coinbase, speaking on CNBC’s Squawk Box outside the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland on Jan. 21st, 2025.

Gerry Miller | CNBC

Still, the industry has largely gotten what it wants.

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong was among the biggest donors in the 2024 election cycle and made it his second job to try and get crypto-friendly candidates elected. Paul Grewal, the company’s legal chief, said the Trump administration has “really flipped the script on crypto.”

“It wasn’t all that long ago that we had an administration that not only was skeptical of this entirely new technology, but was in fact hostile to it,” Grewal said. “Now we have a White House and a wider administration that is not only welcoming of digital assets and blockchain-based technologies, but embracing it in a number of different ways, and that really has stood out in the first 100 days.”

Grewal also pointed to some bipartisan momentum in Congress, including bills on stablecoins and market structure.

“We’ve got one issue, it seems, where the White House, together with Republicans on the Hill, have worked together with Democrats in both houses of the Congress to get digital asset legislation on the move,” Grewal said.

Grewal praised the SEC for soliciting public input and opening the door to industry participation on topics like custody and market structure.

Faryar Shirzad, Coinbase’s chief policy officer, said the administration has already met two core expectations: ending the regulatory crackdown on crypto and working with Congress to deliver clarity.

He said he’s been pleasantly surprised by the scope of the administration’s ambitions to go beyond bitcoin and to integrate blockchain technology across the broader financial system.

“They are moving much more aggressively to try to implement crypto and blockchain technology in the broader capital markets,” he said. At the SEC, he said, that includes tokenizing the equities market and examining how that fits within traditional regulatory frameworks.

Trump’s World Liberty Financial crypto project says it sold $550 million in tokens

Shirzad also noted that bank regulators have begun exploring blockchain-based payment systems. Beyond the $3 trillion crypto market, he said the administration’s target appears to be the $100 trillion capital markets, “and I think that’s something that people should pay close attention to.”

Ripple Chief Legal Officer Stu Alderoty, now president of the National Cryptocurrency Association, said internal data shows that 73% of U.S. crypto holders want to see the country become a global leader in the space.

“The government and the industry can now move out of the courtroom and invest in what the U.S. does best — innovation,” Alderoty told CNBC.

Fred Thiel, CEO of bitcoin mining firm MARA Holdings, pointed to early wins for his slice of the industry. He said the administration’s support for mining technology allows companies “to strengthen the U.S. economy and grid.”

Thiel, who participated in the first White House Digital Assets Summit, praised the swift appointment of pro-crypto officials and the launch of the President’s Council of Advisers on Digital Assets.

Dan Lawrence CEO of OBM, which manages energy use for industrial-scale mining farms, said the administration’s pro-energy stance has made bitcoin a natural tool for incentivizing new power infrastructure.

“Bitcoin is a great way to incentivize the build out of that power,” Lawrence said. “It’s really great to see bitcoin being acknowledged at the federal level.”

WATCH: OCC rescinds key regulatory hurdle for banking system to engage in crypto-related activity

OCC rescinds key regulatory hurdle for banking system to engage in crypto-related activity

Continue Reading

Trending