PayPal really looks to be doing stablecoins the right way: all the money either in cash or U.S. Governments, 100 percent USD backing, full convertibility, assets held in a U.S. regulated financial institution.

This kind of stablecoin should make it much harder for the U.S. regulators to continue their regulation of digital assets only through enforcement actions. Of course, stablecoins are an easier product to understand and regulate than cryptocurrencies, but it's a start.

FSOC operates with less specific statutory authority than any financial regulator. What is it that FSOC should be permitted to do that can not be done by another regulatory organization that is subject to greater Congressional and statutory checks? 

Certainly an interesting juxtaposition where one District Court expressly disputes the holding of a very recent, and important, decision by another Court in the same Circuit. Can the holdings be reconciled because the fact situations are distinguishable?

Lewis Cohen of DLx Law, Jason Gottlieb of Morrison Cohen, and I will discuss the Ripple decision and this case on . We will talk about the holdings, the impact on the digital asset industry and where the government and the regulators…

The staff Progress Report lauds its own efforts at coordinating government entities to build a climate-related financial risk framework, yet seems to assume there's a magical solution to the central requirement - the need for accurate and meaningful data - upon which any framework must rest. What if the data turns out to be wholly inadequate for the stated purpose? See, e.g.,  ("The FRB states in its climate risk exercise, "Challenges [in conducting this analysis] include the…