Photo of Ethan G. Ostroff

Ethan G. Ostroff

Subscribe to Ethan G. Ostroff's Posts

Ethan’s practice focuses on financial services litigation and compliance counseling, as well as digital assets and blockchain technology. With a long track record of successful litigation results across the U.S., both bank and non-bank clients rely on him for comprehensive advice throughout their business cycle.

Follow:Read more about Ethan G. OstroffEthan G.'s Linkedin Profile

On June 24, Senate Banking Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC), Subcommittee on Digital Assets Chair Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC), and Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN) released a set of guiding principles for the development of comprehensive market structure legislation for digital assets. These principles, described in more detail below, aim to provide a foundational framework for discussions and negotiations with industry participants, legal and academic experts, and government stakeholders. This announcement comes on the heels of the House Committees on Agriculture and Financial Services both favorably reporting to the House the CLARITY Act (discussed here), which aims to establish a clear regulatory framework for digital assets in the United States. and the recent passage by the U.S. Senate of the GENIUS Act, a landmark effort to establish a comprehensive federal framework for the payment stablecoins (discussed here).

On June 17, the U.S. Senate voted 68-30 to pass S.1582, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act, known as the GENIUS Act (the Act). This represents a landmark effort by the U.S. Congress to establish a comprehensive federal framework for the regulation of payment stablecoins. Passed with bipartisan support in the Senate, the Act aims to provide regulatory clarity, enhance consumer protection, and safeguard national security in the rapidly growing stablecoin sector.

In a significant ruling today, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered its 6-3 opinion in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corporation, addressing the scope of judicial review under the Hobbs Act. The decision marks a pivotal moment in administrative law, particularly concerning the deference required to agency orders in enforcement proceedings. While the Supreme Court previously addressed whether the Hobbs Act applied in private litigation, it ultimately did not resolve whether a district court is required to follow a particular Federal Communications Commission (FCC) order interpreting the TCPA.

On Tuesday, June 10, the House Committees on Agriculture and Financial Services both favorably reported to the House H.R. 3633, the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act (as amended). Both committees gave overwhelmingly bipartisan support for the bill with the Committee on Agriculture voting 47-6 and the Committee on Financial Services voting 32-19. Both…

After years of uncertainty and regulation by enforcement, the U.S. may finally be moving toward a more comprehensive framework for the regulation of digital assets. On June 4, 2025, the House Committee on Financial Services held a hearing on American Innovation and the Future of Digital Assets: From Blueprint to a Functional Framework. The hearing followed Committee Chairman French Hill’s introduction of H.R. 3633 — the CLARITY Act of 2025 (the Act) — on May 30, 2025. The Committee is expected to continue its markup of the Act at its June 10, 2025, Full Committee Markup hearing.

In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit clarified the expectations for furnishers when investigating consumer disputes under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). In Suluki v. Credit One Bank, No. 23-721 (2d Cir. May 28, 2025), the Second Circuit emphasized that the FCRA requires furnishers to conduct reasonable, not perfect, investigations into disputed accounts. The opinion also cements the fact that summary judgment is possible — and appropriate — when a furnisher conducts a reasonable investigation of a credit dispute.