![\"Can](\"https:\/\/s3-images.ctmedia.io\/media\/article-covers\/2026\/10\/01M4Y6THP0WR3ZHNE9G3WXBFF6\/courtroom-scene-edit-brisov.png\")
<\/figure>\nTo thoroughly examine the intricate legal issues, potential vulnerabilities, and systemic implications surrounding this wave of regulatory activity, legal expert Yuriy Brisov from D&A Partners recently sat down for an in-depth interview to discuss what these developments mean for the future of digital finance in the United States.<\/p>\n
When asked whether agencies like the SEC are actually supposed to create rules or merely interpret existing statutes when Congress fails to act\u2014as SEC Chair Paul Atkins suggested following the failed CLARITY vote\u2014Brisov explained that rulemaking is entirely within the commission’s historical purview. Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which was enacted in the wake of the devastating market meltdown of the late 1920s, the SEC was explicitly granted the power to formulate rules and regulations dictating how broader legislative laws should be applied in practice. <\/p>\n
American legislation is fundamentally designed to establish general frameworks and broad legislative rules, leaving specialized regulatory watchdogs to oversee and adapt those regulations as industries evolve. Brisov noted that this statutory architecture was intentionally created so that when unprecedented technological shifts\u2014such as blockchain tokens\u2014eventually emerged, US legislation and its administrative bodies would possess the structural flexibility to accommodate them. Far from being an overreach, regulatory adaptation has been a core function of the Commission for generations.<\/p>\n
Addressing the question of whether a newly appointed Commission under a different administration can completely reverse or interpret rules in a diametrically opposed manner to its predecessors, Brisov emphasized that such reversals cannot be arbitrary. While administrative priorities can shift, any policy reversal must be strictly anchored within the established body of law. Under former SEC Chair Gary Gensler, the Commission aggressively attempted to apply traditional securities rules to virtually all digital tokens, an approach that ultimately generated widespread regulatory vagueness and drove numerous blockchain companies to abandon the US market entirely. <\/p>\n
This regulatory exodus provided the opening for the new Commission to step in, evaluate the previous regime’s shortcomings, and declare that the former approach failed to work effectively, thereby justifying the introduction of alternative rules. However, Brisov warned that agency powers are far from absolute. If regulatory bodies introduce guidelines that impose unbearable economic burdens on enterprises or mandate bizarre compliance structures, existing administrative laws provide a legal recourse. Damaged parties and corporate entities retain the full right to challenge these regulations in federal court on the grounds that administrative overreach is damaging the broader market.<\/p>\n
Historical precedent supports this avenue of legal pushback. In 2011, when the SEC attempted to implement controversial new rules altering how corporate shareholders cast votes via proxy, the business community balked, labeling the mandate bizarre and economically burdensome. A coalition of corporate interests filed suit against the agency in the landmark case Business Roundtable v. SEC<\/em>, and the business community ultimately emerged victorious.<\/p>\n The legal dynamics governing regulatory challenges have shifted dramatically following a monumental Supreme Court ruling in mid-2024. For four decades, administrative law was heavily influenced by the 1984 Chevron<\/em> doctrine, which dictated that if a statute contained ambiguities or uncertainties, courts were legally obligated to defer to the federal agency\u2019s interpretation of the law. However, in June 2024, the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo<\/em> officially overruled the Chevron<\/em> precedent. Under the current legal standard, federal courts are no longer required to defer automatically to administrative agency interpretations. While courts still recognize the SEC as a powerful authority with unmatched familiarity with securities statutes, judges are now expected to apply their own legal reasoning and evaluate statutory applications independently.<\/p>\n This historic shift naturally raises the probability that SEC and CFTC rules could be successfully overturned in court if challenged by aggrieved industry stakeholders. Brisov noted that while plaintiffs cannot simply approach the judiciary and declare a dislike for a specific regulation, traditional market participants, broker-dealers, or financial firms suffering financial harm can invalidate a rule if they can successfully prove a lack of thorough administrative research, excessive economic burden, and a net negative impact on the US economy. Crucially, Brisov observed that current SEC leadership, including Chair Paul Atkins, has actively engaged in extensive consultations with venture capital firms and native crypto enterprises, suggesting that the newly issued rules are backed by considerable industry research rather than arbitrary overnight decisions.<\/p>\n Looking further ahead, the question remains whether a future SEC administration could unilaterally reverse these rules after businesses have poured massive amounts of capital into building robust financial infrastructure around tokenized assets and digital securities. Brisov explained that administrative law imposes strict procedural hurdles on sudden regulatory reversals. Regulators must carefully account for existing market reliance and capital investments. If a regulation has fostered market growth and demonstrable economic benefit, a future administration cannot simply overrule it on a whim. <\/p>\n Both administrative agencies and federal courts must adhere to structured analytical frameworks\u2014often referred to in legal pedagogy as IRAC: issue, rule, analysis, and conclusion. Any future reversal would require transparent, understandable logic, robust economic background research, and empirical proof that the prior regulatory interpretation was demonstrably insufficient. For instance, even if a regulator personally disliked the foundational Howey<\/em> test established decades ago, they lack the legal authority to abandon it outright. SEC leadership continuously affirms that the Howey<\/em> case remains valid law in the United States, meaning any alternative interpretations must be meticulously explained through transparent legal logic rather than arbitrary executive fiat.<\/p>\n The intricate nature of regulatory communication was also highlighted by the SEC’s recent reliance on frequently asked questions (FAQs) to clarify complex digital asset rules\u2014such as the guidance stating that a crypto project executing token buybacks does not inherently transform a commodity token into a security. When asked whether a company could safely and comfortably launch a token buyback scheme based solely on an agency FAQ, Brisov urged caution. While following guidance drafted by knowledgeable regulatory staff provides practical reassurance, an FAQ carries no formal legal authority and does not constitute binding legislation or formal rulemaking.<\/p>\n Clarifying the distinction, Brisov noted that an FAQ functions essentially as an internal staff manual, akin to a university casebook, designed to guide agency employees on how to interpret and process specific scenarios. These staff notes are frequently rewritten and updated to reflect evolving legal nuances. Indeed, the SEC notably revised its recent token buyback FAQ just a week after its initial publication following pointed critiques from prominent venture capital legal counsel who warned that the initial phrasing left a massive, unintended loophole. This rapid iteration underscores that staff guidance is fluid and subject to swift revision, distinct from the rigid and durable structure of formal regulations or statutory legislation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Just two days following the failed Senate vote, the SEC unveiled a significant five-year exemption…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1725,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[6,1327,4,283,1627,1626,551,7,5],"class_list":["post-1726","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-crypto-security","tag-blockchain","tag-cftc","tag-crypto","tag-legal","tag-opinion","tag-overturned","tag-rules","tag-safety","tag-security"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/smartcryptosecurity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1726","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/smartcryptosecurity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/smartcryptosecurity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smartcryptosecurity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smartcryptosecurity.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1726"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/smartcryptosecurity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1726\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smartcryptosecurity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/1725"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/smartcryptosecurity.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1726"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smartcryptosecurity.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1726"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smartcryptosecurity.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1726"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"Can](\"https:\/\/s3-images.ctmedia.io\/media\/content\/2026\/09\/01M30G4FZV4J0H7SGH19N4NFN3\/paul-atikins-happier.png\")
<\/figure>\n