Oregon’s choice to lead the SEC’s failed lawsuit against Coinbase makes this troubling fact all too clear. It is a shocking example and a clear reminder that innovation will sure lose out every time it’s pitted against regressive regulatory logic. The first and most direct impact affects Coinbase itself, and especially its poorly conceived staking program. In the long run, this potentially strangles crypto’s promise to defend and liberate disadvantaged people everywhere.

Is This Really About Protection?

Let's be real. The SEC’s initial suit rests on the notion that Coinbase’s staking program is an unregistered securities offering. Recently, Oregon has filed its own “copycat” version of this case. Is this really about protecting consumers, or is it about control? The timing is particularly suspect. The SEC’s dismissal of the case followed a change in leadership that pointed to a more industry-friendly approach going forward. Real regulatory approaches Oregon is emerging as a serious contender to lead the crypto battle. It seems hell-bent on pursuing a battle that even the federal permitting agency has, for now at least, chosen to halt.

Think about it. After all, we’re speaking about a technology that could leapfrog us into financial inclusion. In countries all over Africa, for instance, crypto has become a lifeline to those not connected to or served by the banking sector. It empowers everyone to send and receive remittances instantly and without hoarding. They can engage in the global marketplace through ecommerce and digital platforms, microloans, and other financial assistance. Does Oregon truly want to be the grinch that kept these kinds of innovations from serving their citizens?

Financial Inclusion's Unexpected Roadblock?

The link between a Class Action lawsuit in Oregon and financial inclusion in 3rd world countries may not be obvious. Consider this: regulatory uncertainty in developed markets like the US casts a long shadow. It chills investment, stifles innovation, and ultimately delays the adoption of crypto worldwide. The Oregon lawsuit is not only a state-wide domestic issue, it is an international issue.

Consider the example of a smallholder farmer in Kenya who takes out a crypto-based microloan in a matter of seconds to acquire seeds and fertilizer. That loan becomes feasible thanks to a healthy, growing crypto environment. Ecosystems, including both the innovation and sharing economies, flourish in a clear and encouraging regulatory context. They falter when perpetually in the crosshairs of lawsuits based on archaic interpretations of securities laws.

The irony is palpable. Politicians in Washington D.C. are beginning to appreciate the potential of digital assets. In addition, they’re out in front pushing for comprehensive federal legislation, but Oregon wants to pull us all kicking and screaming back to the “regulation by enforcement” days. This isn’t just a loss for Coinbase. It’s a huge setback for sustainable development, financial inclusion, and for the millions who would prosper in a more equitable global financial architecture.

A Call for Collaboration, Not Conflict

Coinbase is absolutely correct to advocate for federal legislation. The current patchwork of state laws and regulatory interpretations not only breeds uncertainty, but establishes a befuddling and sometimes antagonistic climate for crypto enterprises. What we don’t need are ambiguous, unevenly applied rules that create economic uncertainty while failing to protect consumers or foster innovation. Making this a reality demands efforts from regulators, industry players and consumer advocates.

The Oregon lawsuit should be the starting point for a productive discussion, not the start of a new fight. It's time for a serious conversation about how we can harness the power of crypto to promote financial inclusion while mitigating the risks.

Do you think the $2.63 trillion crypto market cap is just a coincidence? People see the potential. Now, it’s time for regulators to step up to the plate. They’ll have to create a governance and regulatory framework that allows it to be realized responsibly. The future of finance, and maybe even global economic equity, hangs in the balance. The solution isn’t regulation by enforcement, it’s regulation by clarity.

  • Clear definitions: What constitutes a security in the digital asset space?
  • Consumer protection: How can we protect consumers from fraud and scams without stifling innovation?
  • International cooperation: How can we work with other countries to develop consistent regulatory standards?

This isn't just about Coinbase's bottom line. We are all in this together — this is about creating a more inclusive financial future for us all. We can only hope that Oregon begins to see the light and continue to be part of the conversation — instead of attempting to end it.

This isn't just about Coinbase's bottom line. This is about building a more inclusive financial future for everyone. Let's hope Oregon reconsiders its approach and joins the conversation, rather than trying to shut it down.