Why Legacy Media & Finance Elites Are Terrified of the GENIUS Act
Wall Street and mainstream media just felt the ground shift. The GENIUS Act—a blockchain-powered regulatory overhaul—is coming for their monopoly.
Gatekeepers on high alert
Traditional power brokers are scrambling as the legislation threatens to dismantle their control over financial infrastructure. No more rent-seeking middlemen—just decentralized protocols cutting out the 30% vig these institutions pocket for moving digits around.
Funny how 'innovation' only counts when it preserves their profit margins.
The backlash proves it's working. When legacy players start lobbying against transparency, you know they're protecting something juicier than grandma's secret cookie recipe. Their playbook? Fear-mongering about 'consumer protection' while quietly shorting the very innovations that could actually protect consumers.
Genius by name, existential threat by nature. The Act doesn't just tweak regulations—it rewrites the rules of financial engagement. And for once, the house doesn't get to stack the deck.
ConsenSys counsel: GENIUS Act under attack
In a detailed post published on X on Wednesday, William Hughes, senior counsel and director of global regulatory matters at blockchain firm ConsenSys, challenged NYT’s analogy between modern stablecoins and 19th-century bank notes. He propounded that the comparison lacks nuance and ignores major differences in technological infrastructure, regulatory oversight, and market dynamics.
GENIUS Act under attack in the @nytimes
Presupposition: orange man bad. (this doesn't drive the argument but is central to its intended rhetorical appeal. or so it seems. now with that out of the way)
The claim: Stablecoins are analogous to the free banking era of the… https://t.co/Au1BJoDUIU
— Bill Hughes 🦊 (@BillHughesDC) June 18, 2025
According to Hughes, free banking era (FBA) notes were often limited in use to specific localities, with limited interoperability and difficult-to-monitor demand.
“Their use in commerce was strictly limited to those businesses, largely local, that WOULD accept them,” Hughes wrote.
In contrast, stablecoins are exchangeable through both centralized exchanges and decentralized finance platforms, with demand data available in real time on hundreds of public tracking systems.
“FBA demand was difficult to perceive and regionally fragmented,” the lawyer noted. “Stablecoins, however, have global demand, especially among those without access to US dollars. Demand dynamics are constantly broadcast across data platforms.”
Hughes also mentioned that the 1800s FBA era had a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction approach, sometimes with no oversight at all. He made a point that stablecoins are subject to a body of federal and state regulations, alongside the GENIUS Act’s proposed framework.
“Granted, I’m not a fancy professor at a fancy college,” Hughes continued, “but I’m a little skeptical that the free banking era really is compelling evidence that stablecoins will bring us pain and sorrow. We should see the bill get to the President’s desk before summer is out. Then we’ll see if these critics’ prognostications of doom and financial ruin will play out.”
Consumer protections and rationale in new legislation questioned
Some industry voices are defending the GENIUS Act, but others, like Geeq.io CEO Stephanie So, believe it has gaps on the consumer protection front. In an X post, she said any regulation of stablecoins must require coins to be fully backed, including proof of reserves on both centralized and decentralized markets, with legal recourse for users.
“Consumers need proof of what they own and a clear path to resolution if something goes wrong,” So warned that without those protections, stablecoins could put individual users at risk.
These necessary changes are moving into the realm of feasibility because @GeeqOfficial's L0 protocol
cannot be manipulated.
That is the infrastructure that true
consumer protections need.
EVERYTHING ELSE is politics. Yes, words matter.
Actions speak louder.
Call me to…
— Stephanie So (@ComplicatedIsOK) June 17, 2025
Jack Zhang, co-founder and CEO of global fintech platform Airwallex, has shared his doubts about the effectiveness of stablecoins in cross-border payment systems, particularly between developed economies.
In a June 7 thread on X, Zhang argued that for business-to-business transactions in G10 currencies, stablecoins have no clear advantage over existing solutions. He explained that platforms like Airwallex already provide virtually zero-cost, real-time settlement for international transactions.
Cryptopolitan Academy: Coming Soon - A New Way to Earn Passive Income with DeFi in 2025. Learn More
