Ripple CEO Takes Aim at JPMorgan's Jamie Dimon Over Digital Asset "CLARITY Act"

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse is urging JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon to "read the bill." Speaking on Fox Business on June 11, Garlinghouse said Dimon has misrepresented the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act's anti-money-laundering provisions, after Dimon criticized the legislation days earlier as insufficient on AML and Bank Secrecy Act safeguards. Dimon first went on the offensive in a June 8 interview, arguing the CLARITY Act does not do enough to prevent money laundering and BSA violations. "The banks will not accept it that way," he said. Garlinghouse pushed back, saying Dimon either misunderstood the legislation or is deliberately portraying it inaccurately. He argued the bill contains a strong compliance framework and would give institutions the regulatory certainty needed to increase participation in digital assets. Senator Cynthia Lummis, a leading crypto advocate in Congress, also challenged Dimon's comments, suggesting he either misread the bill or is attempting to mislead the public about what it contains. The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act aims to settle a core question in U.S. crypto regulation: which regulator is responsible for what. The proposal would set clearer jurisdictional boundaries between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, specifying oversight by asset type. The bill passed the House in 2025 and advanced through the Senate Banking Committee on May 14, 2026. It still faces resistance in the full Senate, with stablecoin yield-related provisions among the sticking points. Garlinghouse used the appearance to spotlight Ripple's stablecoin plans, saying the company's RLUSD stablecoin has reached $1.6 billion in value. He also highlighted Ripple's treasury operations, which he said processed $13 trillion in payments last year. Garlinghouse framed Dimon's AML focus as a tactical choice, given few issues carry more reputational risk for lawmakers and industry leaders. He argued the concern is being used as cover, maintaining that the CLARITY Act already includes the compliance requirements banks and regulators expect and that Dimon's depiction does not align with the text of the legislation.