SEC Slashes Crypto Enforcement by Nearly 60% Under Trump Administration: A Regulatory Thaw?

The regulatory hammer just got lighter. The SEC's crypto enforcement docket has seen a dramatic pullback—a nearly 60% cut in cases during the Trump administration. That's not a rounding error; it's a seismic shift in posture.

The Enforcement Slowdown

Forget the aggressive posture of years past. The data points to a clear pivot. The agency that once chased down ICOs with gusto is now taking a more measured approach. Critics call it a free pass; proponents see it as a necessary recalibration for a maturing asset class. Either way, the landscape just got a lot less hostile for builders.

What This Means for the Market

This isn't just about fewer lawsuits. It's about oxygen. With regulatory pressure easing, innovation isn't just surviving—it's thriving. Projects can breathe, build, and maybe even flirt with concepts that would have drawn an immediate subpoena eighteen months ago. It's the kind of environment where real technological progress happens, not just legal maneuvering.

The new calculus is simple: less time in court means more time on code. The nearly 60% drop in cases signals a potential end to the era of regulation-by-enforcement. For an industry used to playing defense, that's a game-changer. Of course, Wall Street veterans will just shrug and call it another cycle—regulators are either ten years behind the curve or cashing in on the next political trend. Some things never change.

SEC Retreats From Ripple and Binance Cases

Among the most prominent cases cited were the SEC’s long-running lawsuits against Ripple Labs and Binance, both of which have seen significant pullbacks.

The Times also noted that the regulator is “no longer actively pursuing a single case against a firm with known TRUMP ties,” a detail that has intensified scrutiny of the agency’s motives.

The SEC pushed back on suggestions of political favoritism, telling the newspaper that its decisions were driven by legal and policy considerations rather than politics.

The report added that it found no evidence President Trump directly pressured the agency to abandon specific investigations.

Industry figures argue the enforcement retreat reflects a broader reassessment of the SEC’s earlier approach to crypto.

Curious about crypto wallets and how to store and access crypto assets? Check out our Crypto Asset Custody Basics Investor Bulletin.https://t.co/x4HMYMHLAe pic.twitter.com/bSbP25nzOc

Alex Thorn, head of firmwide research at Galaxy Digital, said claims that the shift is linked to Trump’s personal interests overlook what he described as years of aggressive and inconsistent regulation.

Thorn said framing the pivot as politically motivated ignores “four years of direct attacks by the actual partisans.”

The backdrop to the enforcement slowdown includes a deepening connection between Trump-linked entities and the digital asset sector.

In 2025, projects associated with the president or his family expanded significantly, ranging from World Liberty Financial to Trump-branded crypto initiatives, including the OFFICIAL TRUMP memecoin and American Bitcoin, a mining venture backed by the president’s sons.

Leadership Shift at SEC Looms as Final Democratic Commissioner Exits

At the same time, changes at the top of the SEC are set to further reshape the agency’s stance.

Paul Atkins, a Republican appointee seen as more receptive to market-driven regulation, is expected to remain chair for the foreseeable future. However, the commission is preparing to lose its final Democratic member.

Caroline Crenshaw, whose term officially expired in 2024, is expected to depart in January after serving an additional 18 months.

Trump has yet to announce nominees to fill her seat or another vacant Democratic position on the commission.

Crenshaw has been one of the most vocal critics of the SEC’s softer approach to crypto under the Trump administration.

In one of her final public appearances last week, she warned that easing oversight could expose markets to wider contagion risks, cautioning that reduced scrutiny may come at a cost to investor protection.