Jay Clayton, Trump’s next pick for the SDNY’s US Attorney, originally filed the SEC’s lawsuit against Ripple. Clayton promised to end crypto crackdowns at the SDNY but personally started one of the most notorious incidents.
Trump is also planning to use a procedural loophole to avoid a messy confirmation process, which Senator Chuck Schumer swore to block. This incident raises questions about the quality of crypto’s new political allies.
He originally tapped Jay Clayton for this role in November, and he actually became Acting Attorney today. There’s just one concern — Jay Clayton initially filed the SEC’s action against Ripple.
The SEC vs Ripple case is considered a landmark action of the Gensler era, but Clayton actually initiated the suit. Clayton served as the SEC’s Chair from 2017 to 2020, and he resigned more than six months before his term limit.
He filed the SEC suit on December 22 and resigned the very next day in what the company called a “parting shot.”
A few years later, Clayton’s on the other side of government crypto crackdowns. When Trump first tapped him for the role last November, a spokesman claimed that the office would cease crypto enforcement actions.
In 2023, Clayton made televised interview appearances criticizing Gensler’s crackdowns, which infuriated Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse.
Watching this clip makes my blood boil.
The hypocrisy is shocking. @CNBC@SquawkCNBC should be calling him out for the bullshit.
(As a reminder, jay clayton brought the case against ripple, me and Chris Larsen. And left the building the next day).
Today, no representatives from Ripple commented on Clayton’s new role, but it is likely to ruffle feathers all the same. Specifically, the process to get a nominee confirmed by the Senate can be grueling.
According to local media, Trump named Clayton the Acting SDNY US Attorney, intending him to occupy the permanent role. Trump first nominated him last week, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer vowed to block his confirmation.
Schumer claimed Clayton “has no fidelity to the law.”
Regardless, Clayton doesn’t need a confirmation vote to become Acting US Attorney, and he probably won’t need one. If the Senate won’t confirm him in 120 days, judges in the SDNY can appoint him until a nominee gets confirmed.
Trump doesn’t actually need to nominate anyone else, and Clayton could serve a regular term.
This is a very illustrative example of how much political power crypto has gained. Jay Clayton, the man who literally initiated the Ripple suit, will work against future enforcement. And yet, this doesn’t seem like an unambiguous good.
How much can the industry truly rely on its former enemies? How many of crypto’s friends today would gladly join a crackdown tomorrow? These are just some of the concerns among the crypto community.
The term “metaverse” has been tossed around with reckless abandon over the past few years. From flashy product launches to corporate rebrands, the idea of persistent virtual worlds where people live, work, and play has captured mainstream attention—only to fizzle under the weight of speculation, half-baked platforms, and cartoonish avatars.
Many now see the metaverse as nothing more than a marketing gimmick or a niche playground for gamers and tech bros.
But that perception misses a deeper truth: the metaverse isn’t a gimmick—it’s a technological layer still in its early, awkward adolescence.
What matters isn’t how it looks today, but what it enables tomorrow, especially when paired with Web3 and decentralized infrastructure. The ongoing evolution of the metaverse reveals practical applications already taking shape across various sectors.
The Early Hype—and Its Fallout
The first wave of metaverse hype made big promises:
Innovative Virtual meetings would replace offices resulting in business growth.
Avatars would represent us in every aspect of digital life.
Brands rushed in with NFTs and branded plots of virtual land.
Yet, as Alessio Vinassa, entrepreneur and a key figure in the Web3 space, points out:
“When any new technology is framed as a replacement for the old, it’s destined to disappoint. The metaverse isn’t about replacing reality—it’s about enhancing digital experience through ownership and immersion.”
The problem wasn’t the idea—it was the execution. The metaverse didn’t fail; it simply wasn’t ready.
What the Metaverse Actually Is
At its core, the metaverse is:
A network of immersive virtual spaces
Persistent and interoperable (in theory)
Enhanced by AR/VR, AI, and blockchain
Social, interactive, and increasingly programmable
It’s not about gimmicky avatars or crypto speculation. It’s about creating and developing digital environments where people can work, learn, collaborate, and express identity—while owning their data and digital assets.
The Role of Blockchain and Web3
Decentralization gives the metaverse a long-term foundation that walled gardens cannot:
NFTs enable ownership of digital goods—avatars, land, credentials, skins, documents.
DAOs govern virtual communities with transparency and consensus
Interoperable identity means your digital self isn’t locked into Meta, Roblox, or any one app.
In short, Web3 ensures you don’t just use the metaverse—you can co-own it.
As Alessio Vinassa explains:
“Digital spaces without ownership are digital prisons. Decentralization gives the metaverse its freedom—and its future.”
Real-World Use Cases Emerging Today
While much of the press has focused on gimmicks, real utility is quietly unfolding:
1. Education and Training
Universities and enterprises are using metaverse environments for:
Virtual labs and simulations
Immersive language learning
Soft skills training (e.g., empathy through perspective-shifting VR)
Example: Medical schools using VR to simulate surgeries, improving learning outcomes.
2. Virtual Collaboration for Remote Work
Rather than endless Zoom calls, 3D environments allow for:
Team meetings with shared spatial context
Whiteboard sessions, prototyping, and design
Persistent workspaces that mimic physical offices
Companies like Microsoft are investing in this intersection of XR and productivity.
3. Immersive Commerce
Retailers are experimenting with:
Virtual showrooms
Digital try-ons (via AR/VR)
Metaverse-native goods with NFT-linked real-world perks
It’s not about gimmicks—it’s about experience-driven shopping.
4. Cultural and Social Spaces
Art exhibitions, film festivals, and concerts are already happening in metaverse spaces—especially in platforms like Decentraland and Spatial.
These events often feature NFT ticketing, digital collectibles, and audience interaction.
5. Digital Identity and Expression
The metaverse allows people to explore identities, cultures, and interests in ways the physical world might limit.
Blockchain adds permanence and ownership to that expression, moving beyond just avatars to full digital personhood.
Dispelling the Gimmick Narrative
It’s easy to write off the metaverse as a failed trend. But real technologies evolve behind the scenes, not in the headlines.
The internet in 1995 looked like a toy.
Smartphones seemed unnecessary until apps redefined utility.
Cloud computing was “too abstract” until it became foundational.
The metaverse is simply in the infrastructure phase—still building the roads, power grids, and plumbing before the cities can thrive.
As Alessio Vinassa puts it:
“It’s not about whether the metaverse is hype—it’s about whether we’re asking the right questions. Who builds it, who owns it, and who benefits?”
Key Takeaways
The metaverse is not just about flashy visuals—it’s about immersive, interactive, and persistent digital experiences.
Real-world use cases in education, work, commerce, and culture are already proving value.
Web3 enables user ownership, identity, and governance in the metaverse.
Skepticism is valid, but confusing early stumbles with failure is shortsighted.
Visionaries like Alessio Vinassa are helping to guide the metaverse toward sustainable, human-centric design internationally.
Conclusion
The metaverse may have over-promised early on, but it’s far from a failed experiment. It’s a long-term infrastructure shift—one that reimagines how we connect, learn, work, and create in digital spaces.
With decentralization as its backbone and real use cases taking shape, the metaverse is evolving beyond the gimmick into something far more meaningful.
Next in Series: GameFi is a Ponzi Scheme: Rethinking Incentives in Play-and-Earn Models We’ll explore the economic assumptions behind GameFi, debunk the Ponzi narrative, and highlight models that focus on gameplay, sustainability, and community ownership.
Cardano’s price has surged 10% over the past 24 hours, riding the wave of a broader crypto market rally to reach a two-month high.
The sharp move upward has pushed ADA to levels last seen in early March and has reignited bullish sentiment among spot and derivatives traders.
Cardano’s 10% Pump Sparks Surge in Profitable Supply
On-chain data from Santiment reveals that Cardano’s double-digit rally has boosted the percentage of its supply in profit. As of this writing, approximately 74.14% of ADA’s circulating supply—equivalent to 26.91 billion tokens—is now held at a profit.
Cardano Percent of Total Supply in Profit. Source: Santiment
When an asset’s profit supply spikes, it means that a significant portion of its circulating supply is now worth more than when it was acquired. Historically, a rise in profit supply correlates with renewed accumulation and often hints at further upward momentum as market sentiment improves.
Moreover, in the ADA derivatives market, the coin’s funding rate remains firmly positive, indicating that traders are increasingly taking long positions in anticipation of continued gains. This is currently at 0.0099%.
The funding rate is a recurring payment between traders in perpetual futures contracts, designed to keep the contract price aligned with the spot market.
When positive like this, traders holding long positions are paying those with shorts, indicating bullish sentiment and expectations of further price increases.
ADA Rally Gains Steam, but Profit-Taking Could Threaten $0.76 Support
With technical indicators flashing bullish and sentiment strengthening, ADA buyers have regained control, at least for now. If buying pressure strengthens and bull dominance remains, ADA could maintain its upward trend and rally to $0.84.
However, once buyers’ exhaustion sets in and traders begin to lock in their soaring profits, ADA could break below the support at $0.76 and fall toward $0.66.
Regulatory sandboxes have emerged as a concept to drive innovation in a controlled setting. They allow companies to test new crypto products and services while regulators observe and adapt regulations. While jurisdictions like the UK, the UAE, and Singapore have already created sandboxes, the US has yet to create one at the federal level.
BeInCrypto spoke with representatives of OilXCoin and Asset Token Ventures LLC to understand what the US needs to build a federal regulatory sandbox and how it can unify a fragmented testing environment for innovators.
A Patchwork Approach
As the name suggests, regulatory sandboxes have emerged as a tool for providing a controlled testing ground. This environment allows entrepreneurs, businesses, industry leaders, and lawmakers to interact with new and innovative products.
According to the Institute for Reforming Government, 14 states in the United States currently have regulatory sandboxes for fintech innovation.
Of those, 11 are industry-specific and cover other sectors like artificial intelligence, real estate, insurance, child care, healthcare, and education.
Utah, Arizona, and Kentucky are the only jurisdictions among these states with an all-inclusive sandbox. Meanwhile, all but 12 states are currently considering legislation to create some regulatory sandbox for innovation.
Due to its relatively short existence, the crypto market has underdeveloped legislation. While state-level sandboxes enable innovators to demonstrate their products’ capabilities to the public, they are significantly constrained by the lack of federal regulatory sandboxes.
The Need for Federal Oversight
Though statewide efforts to create regulatory sandboxes are vital for innovation, entrepreneurs and businesses still face constraints in developing across borders or reaching an audience at a national level.
Rapid advancements in fields like blockchain and artificial intelligence (AI) add a particular layer of uncertainty, given that existing legal frameworks may not be well-suited to these technologies.
At the same time, regulators may face difficulties in developing appropriate rules for these technologies due to a potential lack of familiarity with these constantly changing industries.
As a result, industry participants are increasingly calling for creating a federal regulatory sandbox. This environment could be a collaborative framework to address the gap, facilitating communication and knowledge sharing between regulators and industry stakeholders.
“The implementation of a federal regulatory sandbox in the United States has the potential to significantly enhance both innovation and regulatory oversight by reducing the uncertainties often associated with navigating the regulatory landscape across state lines. Such an initiative could help establish a coherent framework characterized by uniformity, continuity, and a conducive environment for innovation,” said Paul Talbert, Managing Director of ATV Fund.
According to Rademacher and Talbert, this proposal would meet the needs of all players involved.
Benefits of a Federal Regulatory Sandbox
A sandbox provides innovators with a controlled environment to test products under regulatory oversight without the immediate burden of full compliance with rules that may not yet fit their technology.
It also allows regulators to acquire firsthand insights into blockchain applications, facilitating the creation of more knowledgeable and flexible regulatory policies.
“Startups should have clear eligibility criteria to determine their qualification for participation, while regulators must outline specific objectives—whether focused on refining token classification frameworks, testing DeFi applications, or improving compliance processes,” Rademacher said.
It could also help the United States reinforce its position as a leader in technological innovation.
“By fostering innovation through simplicity, regulatory certainty, and conducive environments, the United States can significantly strengthen its competitive position in the global fintech landscape,” Talbert added.
While the United States has stalled in creating a federal framework for fintech innovation, other jurisdictions around the world have already gained significant ground in this regard.
Global Precedents
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which regulates the United Kingdom’s financial services, launched the first regulatory sandbox in 2014 as part of Project Innovate. This initiative aimed to provide a controlled environment for testing innovative products.
The government asked the FCA to establish a regulatory process to promote new technology-based financial services and fintech and ensure consumer protection.
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Singapore, in particular, have made progressive strides in creating federal regulatory sandboxes.
The UAE, for example, currently has four different sandboxes: the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM) Regulation Lab, the DSFA Sandbox, the CBUAE FinTech Sandbox, and the DFF Regulation Lab.
Their focus areas include digital banking, blockchain, payment systems, AI, and autonomous transport.
Meanwhile, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) launched its Fintech Regulatory Sandbox in 2016. Three years later, MAS also launched the Sandbox Express, providing firms with a faster option for market testing certain low-risk activities in pre-defined environments.
“The success of regulatory sandboxes in jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates has highlighted the importance of key attributes: regulatory collaboration, transparent processes, continuous monitoring, and the allocation of dedicated resources. As a result, a growing number of jurisdictions worldwide are looking to replicate the frameworks established by these pioneering countries to strengthen their competitive position in the global fintech landscape,” Talbert said.
Rademacher believes these jurisdictions’ innovations should prompt the United States to accelerate its progress.
For that to happen, the United States must overcome certain hurdles.
Challenges of a Fragmented US Regulatory Landscape
A fragmented network of federal and state agencies overseeing financial services presents a key challenge to establishing a US federal regulatory sandbox.
“Unlike other countries with a single financial authority overseeing the market, the U.S. has multiple agencies—including the SEC, CFTC, and banking regulators—each with different perspectives on how digital assets should be classified and regulated. The lack of inter-agency coordination makes implementing a unified sandbox more complex than in jurisdictions with a single regulatory body,” Rademacher told BeInCrypto.
Yet, in recent years, important SEC and CFTC actors have expressed interest in adopting a more favorable regulatory approach to innovation.
“Even though I tend to be more of a beach than a sandbox type of regulator, sandboxes have proven effective in facilitating innovation in highly regulated sectors. Experience in the UK and elsewhere has shown that sandboxes can help innovators try out their innovations under real-world conditions. A sandbox can provide a viable path for smaller, disruptive firms to enter highly regulated markets to compete with larger incumbent firms,” Peirce said in a statement last May.
However, the full scope of national regulations far exceeds the authority of these two entities.
Congressional and Constitutional Hurdles
Any legislative measure to develop a federal regulatory framework for sandboxes in the United States would have to undergo Congressional approval. Talbert highlighted several potential constitutional dilemmas the promotion of an initiative of this nature may face.
“These dilemmas include issues related to the non-delegation doctrine, which raises concerns about the constitutionality of delegating legislative power; equal protection considerations under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause; challenges arising from the Supremacy Clause; and implications under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and principles of judicial review,” he said.
To address these complexities, Congress must enact clear legal boundaries that ensure a regulatory framework is both predictable and open. Given the current administration’s emphasis on technological innovation, the prospects for creating a sandbox appear positive.
“Given the current composition of Congress, which aligns with the political orientation of the new executive branch, there may be a timely opportunity for regulatory reform. Such reform could facilitate the creation of a cohesive federal regulatory framework and enhance collaboration among federal agencies,” Talbert told BeInCrypto.
However, creating a federal regulatory sandbox is not a one-size-fits-all solution.
Balancing State Autonomy and Federal Regulations
State autonomy is enshrined in the US Constitution. This protection means that, even though a regulatory sandbox may exist at the national level, individual states still have the authority to restrict or prohibit sandboxes within their jurisdictions.
Encouragingly, most US states are already exploring regulatory sandboxes, and the states that have already implemented them represent diverse political viewpoints.
However, other considerations beyond political resistance must also be addressed.
“A federal regulatory sandbox might also face opposition from established financial institutions, including banks, which may perceive potential threats to their existing business models. Furthermore, federal budgetary constraints could impede the government’s capacity to support the development and maintenance of a federal regulatory framework,” Talbert added.
Effective federal regulations will also require a balance between businesses’ concerns and regulators’ responsibilities.
“The two biggest risks are overregulation—imposing excessive restrictions that undermine the sandbox’s purpose—or underregulation, failing to provide meaningful clarity. If the rules are too restrictive, businesses may avoid participation, limiting the sandbox’s effectiveness. If they are too lax, there is a risk of abuse or regulatory arbitrage. A well-executed federal regulatory sandbox should not become a bureaucratic burden but rather a dynamic framework that fosters responsible growth in the digital asset space,” Rademacher told BeInCrypto.
Ultimately, the best approach will require coordination from different governing bodies, industry stakeholders, and bipartisan collaboration.
Fostering Collaboration for a Successful Sandbox
Due to recent strained communication between tech and federal agencies, Rademacher believes fostering a cooperative atmosphere is essential for creating a functional federal sandbox.
“The approach must be collaborative rather than adversarial. Agencies should view the sandbox as an opportunity to refine regulations in real time, working alongside industry participants to develop policies that foster responsible innovation. Involvement from banking regulators and the Treasury Department could also be valuable in ensuring that digital assets are integrated into the broader financial system in a responsible manner,” he said.
Achieving this requires a bipartisan approach to harmonizing regulatory goals and setting clear boundaries. Industry collaboration with lawmakers and regulators is vital to showing how a sandbox can promote responsible innovation while safeguarding consumers.
“Its success will ultimately depend on whether it serves as a bridge between innovation and regulation, rather than an additional layer of complexity,” Rademacher concluded.
