A three-judge panel ruled Friday that President Donald Trump’s firings without cause of Cathy Harris and Gwynne Wilcox, Democratic members on the Merit Systems Protection Board and the National Labor Relations Board, were lawful.
The split 2-to-1 panel decision of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has no immediate effect, since both Harris and Wilcox’s firings were finalized in May. But Friday’s ruling comes as the Supreme Court is expected to soon hear arguments on whether to overturn a 90-year-old ruling known as Humphrey’s Executor — a decision that could expand Trump’s power to shape independent agencies.
In the 1935 Supreme Court ruling on Humprey’s Executor, the justices unanimously found that commissioners can be removed only for misconduct or neglect of duty, effectively limiting when presidents can fire board members.
But when Judges Gregory Katsas and Justin Walker ruled Friday in favor of Trump’s firings of Harris and Wilcox, they argued that MSPB and NLRB fall outside the limitations stemming from Humphrey’s Executor, and that the president can still “remove principal officers who wield substantial executive power.”
“The NLRB and MSPB wield substantial powers that are both executive in nature and different from the powers that Humphrey’s Executor deemed to be merely quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial,” the judges wrote. “So, Congress cannot restrict the President’s ability to remove NLRB or MSPB members.”
Judge Florence Pan, the dissenting panel member and a Biden appointee, argued that the two agencies do fall under the scope of Humphrey’s Executor, and that maintaining the independence of MSPB and NLRB is critical. She wrote that the Trump administration’s “extreme view of executive power sharply departs from precedent.”
“We may soon be living in a world in which every hiring decision and action by any government agency will be influenced by politics, with little regard for subject-matter expertise, the public good, and merit-based decision-making,” she wrote.
The MSPB is an independent agency responsible for adjudicating appeals from federal employees who allege prohibited personnel practices by their agencies. The NLRB investigates unfair labor practices in the private sector and oversees union elections. Both boards are typically composed of members of both political parties.
Trump fired both Wilcox and Harris within his first few weeks in office, but did not point to a specific reason for the terminations. Wilcox and Harris, both of whom were Democratic board members, sued the president over their removals, arguing that they are protected by a federal law meant to ensure MSPB and NLRB’s independence from political considerations — and that the president can only remove them “for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”
Though a federal judge initially ruled the two terminations were unlawful, the Supreme Court reversed that decision in May, effectively green-lighting the finalization of the board members’ firings earlier this year.
In its May decision, the Supreme Court indicated that it was likely “that both the NLRB and MSPB exercise considerable executive power,” which it said would make restrictions on the president’s ability to fire them unconstitutional. Friday’s panel ruling aligns with the Supreme Court’s initial arguments.
The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments Monday on Trump’s firing of Rebecca Slaughter, a Democratic member of the Federal Trade Commission — a case that may further influence the outcome of both Harris and Wilcox’s terminations.
Mahri Stainnak got the call the day after President Donald Trump took office: the Office of Personnel Management’s human resources office was putting them on administrative leave “effective immediately,” while the agency “investigates your radical and wasteful DEI activity.”
Stainnak was surprised by the news. Before the Trump administration, they served as OPM’s deputy director of the governmentwide Office of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility. But now they worked as the director of OPM’s talent innovation group, a human resources job focused on recruiting and retaining talent across the federal government.
“I said, ‘Wait a minute, I’m not in diversity, equity and inclusion.’ I started a new role in a job that has nothing to do with diversity, equity and inclusion.’ So I felt incredibly shocked and confused,” Stainnak said.
The second call came 48 hours later: Stainnak, a nonbinary person who had worked in the federal government for more than 16 years, received a reduction in force notice, as part of the Trump administration’s plan to root out DEI programs across the federal government.
Stainnak is now part of a class-action lawsuit filed this week in the D.C. District Court for the District of Columbia.
The lawsuit, led by the American Civil Liberties Union of D.C., claims the Trump administration unlawfully targeted and fired federal employees perceived to be associated with DEI work — even if their current jobs had nothing to do with it.
Mary Kuntz, an attorney at the law firm Kalijarvi, Chuzi, Newman & Fitch, P.C. who is representing the former employees, said the administration’s actions “clearly” violate the Civil Service Reform Act, because employees like Stainnak were fired for previous work in DEI positions.
“You can’t RIF somebody from a position they’re not in,” Kuntz said. “They sought to punish Mahri [Stainnak] for previous DEI work. That’s a violation of the First Amendment.”
Kuntz said the lawsuit claims that the administration’s push to “eviscerate” DEI programs also had a disproportionate impact on people of color, women, non-binary individuals, and violates Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
“The DEI folks were working on behalf of people with disabilities, people who are non-native speakers of English. They were advocating for protected groups,” she said.
On the campaign trail last year, President Donald Trump pledged to “eliminate all diversity, equity, and inclusion programs across the entire federal government,” and characterized these programs as promoting “un-American” ideology.
On his first days in office, Trump signed executiveorders that directed agencies to create lists of employees associated with DEI going back to Nov. 5, 2024 — the date of the presidential election. The complaint says agencies were directed to remove those employees, “regardless of their current roles or duties.”
“President Trump’s directives did not merely represent a change in presidential priorities — a normal occurrence when presidential administrations change. Rather, they were targeted actions intended to punish perceived political enemies, as well as to eliminate from the federal workforce women, people of color, and those, like plaintiffs, who advocated for or were perceived as advocating for protected racial or gender groups,” the complaint states.
The complaint says agencies set competitive levels for the RIFs so narrowly that federal employees were unable to compete for retention, and that those impacted by RIFs were not considered for reassignment to other jobs.
“I absolutely feel targeted on the basis of what the Trump administration believes my beliefs are, because I was not working in a diversity, equity and inclusion role in any way at the time when the new administration came in, or at the time I was placed on administrative leave,” Stainnak said.
For all the Trump administration’s actions to strip DEI out of the federal workforce, Kuntz said the president’s executive orders don’t go into any detail to define DEI.
“He characterizes them as illegal and discriminatory and various other things … but does doesn’t define them,” Kuntz said. “You can’t decide that somebody is a different party than the party in the White House and decide to fire them on that basis.”
The lawsuit states that the total number of federal employees impacted by the DEI rollback fis unknown, but says news reports suggest it could be “potentially in the thousands.”
The complaint states that at least 40 women or non-binary individuals, and more than 40 people of color received layoffs in connection with the Trump administration’s directives.
Stainnak and their colleagues filed an appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board in March, but Kuntz said that appeal and similar cases brought before the Office of Special Counsel and agencies’ Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) offices, have stalled.
In their last role, Stainnak helped agencies recruit top talent into the federal workforce. But they said the Trump administration’s purge of DEI workers has pushed out individuals who worked on bipartisan projects.
Former federal employees leading the lawsuit include a former operations manager at the Department of Veterans Affairs who “helped ensure that veterans were not inhibited from accessing earned benefits due to cultural or socioeconomic barriers,” a Department of Homeland Security Employee who led language competency efforts at the border to advance intelligence gathering and the safety of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers.
“By illegally targeting people based on the Trump administration’s assumptions about our political beliefs, or by targeting us based on who we are, this administration actually is hurting the people who work and live in this country, because now these dedicated, hardworking federal servants are not in their jobs providing the critical services that they do, whether it’s responding to emergencies like hurricanes and making sure folks have drinking water and shelter, or making sure our transportation systems are safe and timely. This action is really hurting the people who live in this country,” Stainnak said.
President Donald Trump walks out of the Cabinet Room following a Cabinet meeting at the White House, Tuesday, Dec. 2, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)
Bitcoin’s trajectory is becoming a central theme in the first family’s business interests, with Eric Trump explaining why he believes the market is setting up for a dramatic surge. His comments, made in a YouTube interview with Grant Cardone, offered a rare look into how American Bitcoin Corp (ABTC) approaches the crypto industry and why the Trumps consider BTC one of the most important financial opportunities of the decade.
Eric Trump Thinks Parabolic Rally Is Coming For Bitcoin
Eric Trump made it clear that ABTC operates on the conviction that Bitcoin is gearing up for a powerful upward acceleration. American Bitcoin is a publicly traded BTC mining and accumulation company co-founded by Eric Trump in partnership with Hut 8 Corp.
According to Eric Trump, the company is structured to maximize its BTC holdings ahead of that move rather than dilute resources on heavy management costs or constant liquidations. In his words, the comparison with other miners is straightforward because ABTC wants to hold the asset it believes will appreciate sharply instead of turning mined Bitcoin into daily operating cash.
His reasoning is a departure from the traditional mining business model, which typically sells a significant share of its Bitcoin to cover operational costs. Trump insists that ABTC is deliberately positioning itself differently because “we want to be buying the asset that we believe is going to appreciate.”
Eric Trump said BTC’s surge is not limited to ordinary crypto investors but is also driven by the quiet entry of sovereign funds, family offices, and major institutions. He also contrasted Bitcoin with real estate, noting that he now spends more time in crypto because it grows in ways traditional property cannot.
Real estate is slow and tied to limited cash flow, while Bitcoin scales globally and appreciates far faster. That difference is one of the reasons he expects BTC to reach around $500,000 in the long term, a prediction he offered without hesitation.
ABTC’s Unique Model: Building BTC Per Share
Ashet Genoot, CEO of Hut 8 Corp., expanded on the company’s internal philosophy by explaining how ABTC measures value differently from other publicly traded firms. Instead of focusing on earnings per share, he said their model centers on “Bitcoin per share,” which is a metric that reflects how much BTC each shareholder indirectly controls through the company.
Genoot explained that the question they ask every day is simple: how do we grow the amount of Bitcoin per share? He described their system as a constant pursuit of increasing BTC reserves through multiple channels, whether mining coins at scale or buying them whenever conditions favor accumulation.
The goal is for every ABTC shareholder to benefit from a rising quantity of BTC over time, turning the company into a long-term accumulator rather than a miner that immediately sells its output to cover expenses.
According to regulatory filings, ABTC operates tens of thousands of ASIC miners under Hut 8’s infrastructure and has accumulated more than 4,000 BTC as of late 2025.
According to interviews with Eric Trump and ABTC Executive Chairman Asher Genoot, American Bitcoin (ABTC) has structured its business around one clear aim: add more Bitcoin to its balance sheet.
The firm says it spends less on big management teams and more on mining and buying Bitcoin so each share holds more Bitcoin over time. That metric — Bitcoin per share — is tracked in the same way public companies track earnings per share, the executives said.
American Bitcoin Tracks Bitcoin Per Share
ABTC’s leaders told investors they treat the number of Bitcoin each share represents as the core performance measure. Genoot said the firm began with a single question: “What do investors actually want from a Bitcoin-focused business?”
Based on reports, the answer they reached was simple — grow the amount of Bitcoin held per share. That amount, they say, should rise each day thanks to mining and occasional purchases when markets look attractive.
Company Adds BTC ‘At A Steep Discount’
Trump told investor Grant Cardone that ABTC adds new Bitcoin to its balance sheet every day at what he described as a steep discount compared to market prices. According To his comments, the firm also plans to keep buying when conditions are favorable.
The approach is straightforward: mine and accumulate rather than chase short-term fiat profits. This strategy is pitched as a way to give shareholders more direct exposure to Bitcoin’s future gains.
JUST IN: Trump family-backed #Bitcoin miner American Bitcoin Corp increased its holdings by 363 BTC and now holds a total of 4,367 BTC.
Trump has made very large price forecasts publicly. He forecast $1 million for Bitcoin in late 2024 and repeated that belief during 2025 at a conference in Hong Kong.
During a recent interview, he projected Bitcoin could trade above $500,000 within the next four years, marking November 2029 as a benchmark date. Those figures underline why ABTC’s model is built on a long-term and highly optimistic outlook for BTC.
Global Demand And Institutional Access
Trump pointed to strong demand in many parts of the world as part of his reasoning. He said he sees interest from governments, family offices, big companies, and wealthy individuals.
Reports have disclosed that regions with weak currencies or high inflation show faster adoption, because people there often want assets that are hard for authorities to seize.
He also noted that mainstream financial firms now offer more ways to get exposure to crypto, which he believes makes it easier for everyday investors to buy in.
Featured image from ABC News, chart from TradingView
US President Donald Trump issued a full pardon on December 2, 2025, freeing former Honduran leader Juan Orlando Hernández from a US federal sentence.
Hernández had been convicted in 2024 on drug trafficking and weapons charges and was serving a 45-year term after prosecutors said he helped traffickers move hundreds of tons of cocaine toward the United States.
Prison Tie Raises Eyebrows
According to reports, the pardon by Trump drew quick praise from Sam Bankman-Fried, who is serving a 25-year federal sentence after his conviction in the FTX collapse case.
In a post on X, Bankman-Fried wrote: “I’m so glad Juan Orlando is free — few are more deserving than him.”
The two men once shared one prison dormitory while detained in the US, a detail that adds a personal dimension to the reaction.
Political Timing And Pushback
Based on reports, the move came just before a closely fought Honduran vote and prompted sharp criticism from lawmakers and anti-drug officials. Opponents said freeing a former head of state convicted in the US weakens long-standing efforts to curb trafficking.
I’m so glad Juan Orlando is free–few are more deserving than him.
Supporters argued that Hernández faced political attacks and that the Trump pardon corrected an injustice. Multiple voices in Congress called the decision troubling, and several advocacy groups said it could undercut trust in US drug enforcement.
Questions About International Impact
Reports have disclosed concern among analysts that the pardon could affect US ties in the region and might influence public opinion inside Honduras. Some legal experts warned the action risks setting a precedent where high-level convictions can be overturned by executive clemency after sentencing.
Others noted that clemency is a long-standing presidential power, and pointed to past instances when presidents used it for political or humanitarian reasons.
Trump Pardon: Reaction On The Ground
Local and international reaction was mixed. Human rights organizations urged careful review of the pardon’s implications for rule-of-law efforts, while certain political allies in Honduras hailed the release as a victory.
Commentators also highlighted that prosecutors had linked Hernández to large-scale shipments of narcotics, a fact that made the pardon especially controversial among drug-control officials.
What This Means For Bankman-Fried
Based on reports, Bankman-Fried’s public support appears tied to his own efforts to seek clemency. Observers suggested that the endorsement could be intended to draw attention to his case or to court favor.
Whether the presidential action will have any bearing on other clemency requests remains unclear, but the episode has already sparked debate over the boundaries of presidential pardon power.
Featured image from Getty Images, chart from TradingView
Former Environmental Protection Agency employees who were fired after signing a letter criticizing the Trump administration are now appealing their dismissals before the Merit Systems Protection Board.
The six former EPA employees, who were among roughly 140 workers who signed a “declaration of dissent” in June, argued their firings were not only an illegal response to exercising their First Amendment rights, but also a form of retaliation for “perceived political affiliation,” and executed without cause.
The former employees are represented by attorneys at several law firms in the MSPB case, including the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
“Federal employees have the right to speak out on matters of public concern in their personal capacities, even when they do so in dissent,” Joanna Citron Day, general counsel for PEER, said Wednesday. “EPA is not only undermining the First Amendment’s free speech protections by trying to silence its own workforce, it is also placing U.S. citizens in peril by removing experienced employees who are tasked with carrying out EPA’s critical mission.”
An EPA spokesperson declined to comment, stating that the agency has a longstanding practice of not commenting on pending litigation.
The June dissent letter from EPA employees warned that the Trump administration and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin were “recklessly undermining” the agency’s mission, and criticized the administration’s policies on public health and the environment. The letter led EPA to launch an investigation into employees who signed the letter, resulting in at least eight probationary employees and nine tenured career employees receiving termination notices. Dozens more who signed the declaration were suspended without pay for two weeks, according to the American Federation of Government Employees.
Justin Chen, president of AFGE Council 238, which represents EPA employees, said the firings of these employees added to a “brain drain” at EPA, on top of other workforce losses stemming from the deferred resignation program (DRP) and other actions from the Trump administration this year.
“These were subject matter experts — extremely talented people who were working on behalf of the American public to protect them,” Chen said in an interview. “The loss of these people will be felt for quite some time. And honestly, the intent of this action is to put a chilling effect on the rest of the civil service.”
A termination notice delivered to one of the EPA employees shows that in response to concerns of free speech and whistleblower protection violations, the agency’s general counsel office stated that it believed the issues raised “do not outweigh the seriousness of your offense.”
“The Agency is not required to tolerate actions from its employees that undermine the Agency’s decisions, interfere with the Agency’s operations and mission, and the efficient fulfillment of the Agency’s responsibilities to the public,” the termination letter reads. “You hold a trust-sensitive position that requires sound judgement and alignment with the Agency’s communication strategies.”
Despite the employee having a high performance rating and a lack of disciplinary history, the termination letter stated that “the serious nature of your misconduct outweighs all mitigating factors.”
“I also considered that you took no responsibility for your conduct, which reflects a lack of acknowledgment of the seriousness of your actions and raises concerns about your ability to exercise sound judgment and undermines your potential for rehabilitation,” the letter reads.
In August, EPA leadership also canceled all its collective bargaining agreements and told its unions it would no longer recognize them. The decision came after an appeals court allowed agencies to move forward with implementing President Donald Trump’s March executive order to terminate union contracts at a majority of federal agencies.
“If we still had our collective bargaining rights, none of this would have happened in the first place. We would have immediately filed grievances,” Chen said. “[With the MSPB appeal] our hope is that these employees get everything back — that they will have full reinstatement and full back pay.”
A Donald Trump-backed push has failed to wedge a federal measure that would block states from passing AI laws for a decade into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) told reporters Tuesday that a sect of Republicans is now “looking at other places” to potentially pass the measure. Other Republicans opposed including the AI preemption in the defense bill, The Hill reported, joining critics who see value in allowing states to quickly regulate AI risks as they arise.
For months, Trump has pressured the Republican-led Congress to block state AI laws that the president claims could bog down innovation as AI firms waste time and resources complying with a patchwork of state laws. But Republicans have continually failed to unite behind Trump’s command, first voting against including a similar measure in the “Big Beautiful” budget bill and then this week failing to negotiate a solution to pass the NDAA measure.
Cayman foundation registrations surge as Web3 projects seek safer, liability-shielded structures.
DAOs turn to Cayman models after US rulings raise risks for unwrapped decentralised organisations.
New OECD reporting rules take effect in 2026, but most DAO treasury foundations may remain exempt.
The Cayman Islands is recording a sharp rise in foundation company registrations as Web3 projects reassess where to base their legal entities.
New figures show a strong year-on-year jump in these registrations, signalling how the jurisdiction is becoming a preferred destination for decentralised projects seeking legal clarity.
The growth began gathering pace toward the end of 2024 and has already carried into 2025, with communities and developers looking for structures that can support expanding ecosystems.
The trend reflects how recent legal developments, particularly in the United States, are prompting DAOs and Web3 organisations to seek more predictable, liability-shielding frameworks.
DAO structure shifts
Foundation companies in the Cayman Islands are increasingly being used as legal wrappers for DAOs and as ecosystem stewards for major Web3 networks.
Registrations now include more than 1,300 entities at the end of 2024 and over 400 newly formed in 2025.
Cayman Finance reports that many leading Web3 projects have chosen the jurisdiction, including at least 17 foundations that oversee treasuries above the hundred-million threshold.
These entities allow DAOs to sign agreements, manage intellectual property, hire contributors, and interact with regulators without exposing tokenholders to personal liability.
The shift accelerated after the Samuels v. Lido DAO decision in 2024, where a US federal court found that an unwrapped DAO could be treated as a general partnership under California law.
This prompted many communities to reassess their structures.
The Cayman model provides separate legal personality and ownership capabilities that help plug this liability gap.
Add tax neutrality and a framework familiar to institutional allocators, and the jurisdiction becomes attractive to projects that need both compliance readiness and operational flexibility.
Global Web3 competition
Jurisdictions worldwide are trying to position themselves for the next wave of Web3 growth.
The US has made repeated political pledges about becoming a global crypto hub, particularly under President Donald Trump, yet only a few states explicitly recognise DAOs as legal persons.
This leaves many organisations navigating fragmented rules at the entity level.
Switzerland remains a major onshore centre for Web3 foundations, with the Crypto Valley region now hosting more than 1,700 active blockchain firms and recording growth of over 130% since 2020.
Foundations and associations have become an increasingly important part of this expansion, although projects continue to diversify their jurisdictional footprints in search of structures aligned with their long-term plans.
Compliance changes
The rise in Cayman-based Web3 foundations coincides with a major regulatory shift.
The Cayman Islands has implemented the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework, with new Tax Information Authority regulations taking effect from January 1, 2026.
The framework brings due diligence and reporting requirements for “Reporting Crypto-Asset Service Providers,” covering entities that exchange crypto for fiat or other crypto, operate trading platforms, or provide custodial services.
These entities will need to collect tax-residence information from users, track specific transactions, and submit annual reports to the Tax Information Authority.
Legal professionals note that the rules are expected to apply only to service providers engaged in exchange or brokerage activity.
Structures that merely hold crypto assets, such as protocol treasuries, investment funds, or passive foundations, are likely to fall outside this reporting scope under the current interpretation.
This suggests that many DAO-related foundations that act purely as ecosystem stewards or treasury vehicles may continue to benefit from Cayman’s legal certainty without assuming full reporting duties, so long as they are not running exchange, brokerage, or custody operations.
As Web3 organisations mature and adapt to evolving compliance landscapes, the Cayman Islands appears set to remain a central node in the global distribution of decentralised governance structures.
Shares of American Bitcoin, the mining and accumulation firm co-founded by Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., tumbled sharply on Tuesday after a portion of the company’s stock was released from its lockup period.
Key Takeaways:
American Bitcoin shares plunged nearly 50% after newly unlocked stock hit the market following the lockup expiry.
Eric Trump dismissed the selloff as expected and said he has no plans to sell his personal stake.
Investor nerves remain high as ABTC is still down about 76% from its September peak despite strong earnings growth.
Data from Google Finance showed ABTC plunged nearly 50% within the first hour of trading, falling to as low as $1.80 from a prior close of $3.58.
The stock recovered modestly through the session but still ended the day down 38.83% at $2.19, highlighting the impact of newly unlocked shares hitting the market.
Eric Trump Shrugs Off ABTC Selloff After Lockup Ends
In a post on X, Eric Trump said the selloff was expected, noting that pre-merger private placement shares had just unlocked.
He added that the company’s business remains strong and that he has no plans to sell his own holdings. American Bitcoin listed on Nasdaq in September after completing its merger with Gryphon Digital Mining.
The sharp drop came despite solid financial results last quarter. In October, the company reported third-quarter revenue of $64.2 million, up from $11.6 million a year earlier, while net income swung to a $3.5 million profit from a $0.6 million loss.
Chief executive Michael Ho said at the time the firm had more than doubled its mining capacity and improved margins, citing a seven-point increase quarter over quarter.
Thanks @Coachjv_. Today our pre-merger private placement shares unlocked — these early investors are freely available to cash in on their profits for the first time which is why we will see volatility.
Our fundamentals are virtually unmatched and our differentiator: mining BTC… https://t.co/7h1Aqjt8iE
American Bitcoin has also been building its treasury. As of Nov. 13, the company said it held about 4,090 BTC, including coins kept in custody or pledged toward new mining equipment.
Management has framed the strategy as a push to increase direct exposure to Bitcoin while also growing production volume.
Even so, the recovery attempt failed to reverse a broader decline in the stock since its September peak of $9.31.
Shares are now down roughly 76.5% from that high, reflecting investor caution around supply unlocks and volatility tied to early backers exiting positions.
The selloff mirrors a wider slump in crypto-linked equities. Shares of Coinbase have fallen about 20% over the past month, while USDC issuer Circle is down 39%. Exchange operator Gemini has dropped 47% in the same period.
Democrats Accuse Trump of Using Presidency to Enrich Family
As reported, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee released a report accusing the Trump administration of using presidential authority to benefit the Trump family’s crypto businesses, claiming roughly $800 million was generated from token sales in early 2025.
The report alleges the president blurred the line between public office and private profit, and estimates that Trump family crypto holdings could reach $11.6 billion, though exact values are difficult to verify.
The findings raise concerns about foreign influence, focusing on investments in World Liberty Financial’s $WLFI token.
Lawmakers highlight a reported $75 million investment by crypto figure Justin Sun while he faced regulatory scrutiny, and a separate $100 million purchase by an entity called Aqua 1 Foundation, which investigators say lacks clear corporate records.
The fund’s leadership is also alleged to include figures tied to legal and geopolitical controversies.
Lawmakers on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee have advanced a slew of federal workforce bills, one of which aims to make some significant changes to the federal probationary period.
The GOP-led EQUALS Act was one of about a dozen bills that passed favorably out of the committee on Tuesday. If enacted, it would require new federal employees to serve a two-year probationary period, doubling the length that most newly hired or promoted currently face.
Under the bill, agencies also would have to actively certify that a probationary employee “advances the public interest” before the employee can become officially tenured, while those who are not certified would be removed from their jobs. The legislation advanced in a party line vote of 24-19.
Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas), who introduced the legislation, said the EQUALS Act builds on an April executive order from President Donald Trump, which similarly required agencies to review and actively sign off on probationary workers’ continued employment.
“President Trump could not be more right,” Gill said. “Probationary periods and trial periods are long-standing, essential tools to ensure newly hired federal employees are sufficiently performing before their appointments are finalized permanently.”
Democrats on the committee criticized the Republicans’ bill, arguing that extending the length of the probationary period would negatively impact federal recruitment, as well as open the doors to more terminations of new hires in the government.
“This bill would double the time during which federal employees have limited due process and appeal rights as probationary employees. During this time they could be fired within 30 days’ notice, they have limited rights to an attorney or representative and they generally cannot appeal their removal,” Oversight Committee Ranking Member Robert Garcia (R-Calif.) said Tuesday. “At a time when Donald Trump is attempting illegal mass firings and purging experts from agencies across our government, this bill is a dangerous step in the wrong direction.”
Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-Va.) added that the EQUALS Act would “give the Trump administration yet another tool to weaponize against federal employees who they perceive as ideological threats, and to continue efforts to destroy the non-partisan civil service.”
Gill, however, argued that the bill would not lead to mass terminations, but instead only make sure that new federal employees are carefully reviewed. He also pointed to a 2015 report from the Government Accountability Office, as well as a 2005 report from the Merit Systems Protection Board, both of which call for reforms to the probationary period.
“An employee can often work for the federal government for over 25 years,” Gill said. “Having an extra year of probationary status to ensure the right employee becomes tenured is a common sense, good government measure.”
During the committee meeting, Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) motioned to strike the EQUALS Act and replace it with legislation to first require GAO to review effects of prior probationary period extensions before making any long-term changes. Lynch’s amendment was struck down by the committee’s Republican majority.
Legislation on official time advances
Committee Republicans also advanced a bill that would require agencies to report in greater detail the use of official time by federal employees governmentwide. The Official Time Reporting Act passed out of the committee in a vote of 24-19 along party lines.
If enacted, the bill would require all agencies to submit reports on how much official time is used in each fiscal year, and justify any potential increases in official time that may occur.
During the committee meeting, Republican lawmakers argued that official time takes away from employees’ job responsibilities. Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), the lead co-sponsor on the bill, also criticized the lack of agencies’ reporting on official time over the last several years.
The bill “will let the American people know exactly how much of their hard-earned money is spent not providing valuable service, but on federal employee union activities,” Foxx said.
Some committee Democrats, however, described the legislation as an attack on union rights. The lawmakers emphasized that official time is used for activities that support federal employees, while raising concerns about the possibility that the bill could let the Trump administration further limit union rights.
“This year under the Trump administration, federal employees have faced job insecurity, financial strain and the loss of collective bargaining agreements. This bill will make matters worse,” Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.) said. “We all benefit when unions and their members are empowered to prevent and address retaliation, discrimination and sexual harassment.”
Generally, official time hours can go toward negotiating union contracts, meeting with management, filing grievances or representing employees dealing with management disputes. Under law, federal unions are allotted specific amounts of time and resources to conduct these activities.
Federal unions, including the American Federation of Government Employees, have pushed back against the Trump administration’s characterization of official time as “taxpayer-funded union time,” calling it a misrepresentation.
During Tuesday’s meeting, Garcia argued that official time leads to lower staff turnover and higher employee morale, while also preventing potential legal costs down the road.
“Official time is work time that employees are allowed to use for making the workplace safe and protecting workers from discrimination or harassment,” he said.
Committee approves some bills with bipartisan support
In contrast, some legislation that the committee approved on Tuesday gained strong bipartisan support from lawmakers. That includes bills on training for federal supervisors, skills-based hiring of federal contractors and amending the system for relocation payments for federal employees.
The Federal Supervisor Education Act, for instance, unanimously advanced out of the Oversight committee in a vote of 43-0. If enacted, the legislation would require agencies to work with OPM to create training programs for newly hired or promoted agency managers and supervisors.
Rep. William Timmons (R-S.C.), who introduced the legislation in October, argued during Tuesday’s meeting that many federal supervisors step into leadership roles without enough training, and with no clear expectations for how to adjust to a managerial role in government.
“Agencies promote strong technical employees into supervisory jobs, and then send them in blind,” Timmons said. “That leads to low productivity, uneven standards and a system where good employees feel unsupported and bad employees rarely face consequences.”
Timmons added that the legislation would result in “real, meaningful training,” rather than being “a slideshow or a checkbox exercise.”
Although he said he mostly agreed with the bill’s intentions, Walkinshaw proposed striking one provision of the legislation. The initial bill text included a requirement that supervisory training programs must include additional training on the probationary period — something that Walkinshaw argued was outside the bill’s scope.
Committee Republicans agreed to adopt Walkinshaw’s amendment, after saying that it would result in stronger bipartisan support for the bill. Ultimately, the legislation advanced unanimously, with the amendment included.
“I am a strong supporter of the goal of this legislation,” Walkinshaw said. “Almost all of the language will provide supervisors within the federal workforce the appropriate training and resources to ensure there are strong leaders within their respective agencies.”
According to prepared testimony from Acting FDIC Chair Travis Hill, the agency expects to publish a proposed rule that lays out how stablecoin issuers will apply for federal oversight before the end of December 2025.
What The Draft Will Cover
Based on reports, the initial proposal will focus on the “application framework” — the paperwork, disclosures and standards firms must meet to seek approval as regulated stablecoin issuers.
The proposal is not the final set of bank-level rules; it will outline the process, while a second proposal that spells out capital, liquidity and reserve requirements is slated for early next year.
Market Reaction And Immediate Impact
Reports have disclosed that the GENIUS Act, the law behind this process, named the FDIC as a lead regulator for bank-related stablecoins and set deadlines for implementing agencies to act.
The move is expected to provide clearer guidance for firms that want to issue USD-pegged coins under federal supervision. Some firms could alter their timelines or pause launches until the rules are final.
Stablecoin: How The Law Got Here
The GENIUS Act was passed by Congress in mid-2025 and signed into law by US President Donald Trump on July 18, 2025. The Senate approved the bill by a 68–30 vote and the House backed it 308–122.
The statute lays out which agencies do what, and it requires a sequence of rulemakings, such as capital and liquidity standards, that regulators must implement.
Public Comment Period
Officials say the FDIC’s first proposed rule will be followed by a public comment period, giving industry groups, banks and nonbank firms a chance to respond.
After that, prudential measures aimed at FDIC-supervised issuers — the rules that set minimum capital cushions and reserve asset standards — will be proposed early next year.
Analysts and industry observers will be watching closely to see whether the FDIC limits its oversight mainly to bank-sponsored stablecoins or seeks a broader scope.
They will also pay attention to how strict the capital and liquidity requirements will be when the rules are proposed in early 2026.
Coordination with other regulatory agencies will be another key focus, since the GENIUS Act assigns responsibilities across several federal regulators.
Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView
American Bitcoin’s stock unraveled in real time Tuesday.
The mining and Bitcoin-treasury company co-founded by Eric Trump saw its stock plunge more than 50% in the first hour of trading, triggering multiple halts and wiping out months of speculative gains.
The company, listed on Nasdaq under the ticker ABTC, had already been reeling from Bitcoin’s steep pullback over the past month.
But the speed of Tuesday’s sell-off stunned even veteran crypto-equity watchers. Shares collapsed to an intraday low of $1.75, a 51% drop, before stabilizing slightly. By time of writing, the stock is still down more than 35%.
No single headline set off the avalanche. But market conditions were brittle. A day earlier, nearly $1 billion in leveraged crypto positions were liquidated. Bitcoin had crashed to the mid-$85,000s.
A miner tied to a political brand
Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. helped launch American Bitcoin earlier this year. Eric serves as co-founder and chief strategy officer. Donald Trump Jr. is listed as an investor.
Their involvement gave the company immediate name recognition, but also tied ABTC’s identity to one of the most politically charged families in America.
The firm was spun out of Hut 8 and went public in September through a reverse-merger with Gryphon Digital Mining.
The market liked the story at first. Shares spiked to $9.31 in the early days. Some traders treated it like another Trump-themed momentum play.
But that momentum hasn’t lasted. Since that September peak, the stock is now down more than 78%.
SEC filings show most insiders, including the Trump sons, are barred from selling shares until at least March 2026. That ruled out insider-dumping speculation.
Bitcoin rebounds — but American Bitcoin doesn’t
What made Tuesday’s collapse even more striking was that it happened as Bitcoin surged. After the Monday washout, BTC roared back above $91,000 by midday Tuesday. Most crypto-exposed stocks bounced. American Bitcoin wasn’t one of them.
Heavy volume — more than 55 million shares, compared with a 3 million daily average — signaled a stampede for the exits.
ABTC’s business is deeply tied to the price of Bitcoin. The company says it holds more than 3,000 BTC accumulated through mining and market purchases.
In its third-quarter report, American Bitcoin posted $64.2 million in revenue and $3.5 million in net income. These are fairly healthy numbers — better than many miners.
Trump-linked crypto ventures take a hit
The sell-off has extended beyond ABTC. WLFI, the token tied to World Liberty Financial, fell more than 30% from its recent high, according to Bloomberg.
ALT5 Sigma, which holds WLFI in its treasury, dropped over 80%. Trump Media & Technology Group, the operator of Truth Social, also fell sharply after its $2 billion Bitcoin and crypto holdings lost roughly 25% of value.
Donald Trump’s stake in Trump Media has declined by an estimated $800 million since September. Other Trump-related crypto ventures, including miners, tokens, and meme coins, also faced heavy losses.
Eric Trump has called all bitcoin volatility a “buying opportunity,” saying investors who embrace dips could benefit.
The Trump administration has renamed the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, now calling it the National Laboratory of the Rockies, marking an identity shift for the Colorado institution that has been a global leader in wind, solar and other renewable energy research.
“The new name reflects the Trump administration’s broader vision for the lab’s applied energy research, which historically emphasized alternative and renewable sources of generation, and honors the natural splendor of the lab’s surroundings in Golden, Colorado,” said Jud Virden, laboratory director, in a statement.
He did not specify what this “broader vision” would mean for the lab’s programs or its staff of about 4,000.
A second FDIC rule on prudential requirements will follow early next year.
The FDIC will supervise bank subsidiaries issuing payment stablecoins.
Guidance on tokenised deposits is under development.
US regulators are moving quickly to build the country’s new stablecoin supervision system, with federal agencies preparing detailed rulemaking as the GENIUS Act begins to shape policy.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is set to publish an application framework for payment stablecoin issuers later this month, marking one of the earliest steps in implementing the law signed by President Donald Trump earlier this year.
Alongside the FDIC, the Federal Reserve, and the Treasury Department are working on their own regulatory responsibilities, signalling a coordinated effort to bring stablecoins under a clearer, more structured oversight regime.
FDIC develops licensing framework for stablecoin issuers
The FDIC has confirmed through written testimony scheduled for delivery to the House Financial Services Committee on December 2 that it is close to releasing a proposed rule outlining how payment stablecoin issuers will apply for approval.
The agency began the process earlier this year as part of its duty to implement the GENIUS Act, and the first formal proposal is expected before the end of the month.
Another proposal focusing on prudential requirements for FDIC-supervised issuers is planned for early next year.
Once the application framework is published, the agency will gather public comments before moving toward a final rule, a phase that typically spans several months.
GENIUS Act expands oversight for bank-linked stablecoins
The GENIUS Act introduces a national structure that requires federal and state regulators to coordinate their supervision of stablecoin issuers.
Under the law, the FDIC will oversee and license subsidiaries of insured depository institutions that issue payment stablecoins.
The agency will also set out capital rules, liquidity expectations, and reserve diversification standards.
Much of this work will roll out over the coming year, as several rulemakings are needed to meet the obligations laid out in the legislation.
The FDIC is also consulting recommendations released in July by the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets, which urged regulators to clarify digital asset activities allowed for banks, including asset and liability tokenisation.
Tokenised deposits included in regulatory review
In addition to its stablecoin responsibilities, the FDIC is preparing new guidance aimed at clarifying how tokenised deposits will be treated under federal regulation.
This area has gained attention as banks explore digital versions of traditional deposit products.
The forthcoming guidance is expected to help institutions understand which activities fall within supervisory boundaries and how they will be monitored.
Federal Reserve coordinates its own stablecoin standards
The Federal Reserve is coordinating with other banking regulators to craft capital, liquidity, and diversification standards required under the GENIUS Act.
The focus includes creating clarity for banks engaged in digital asset activities and providing regulatory feedback on new use cases as they emerge.
This joint push aims to ensure the banking system can support digital asset development while maintaining stability and compliance.
Other agencies are also advancing their obligations under the GENIUS Act.
The Treasury Department has already completed its public consultations, which concluded in November, and is developing its own rules.
These efforts will run in parallel with the FDIC and Federal Reserve processes, contributing to the broader national framework being built to govern stablecoins across the US.
Login
All News – Federal News Network
Bitcoin Magazine
