As individuals with experience as ethics lawyers in the White House, we maintained an important bipartisan standard: it is critical for presidents and senior officials to avoid any situation where their official responsibilities might appear linked to personal financial interests. Throughout previous administrations, a common expectation was for these leaders to divest conflicting investments, utilize blind trusts, or manage diversified financial portfolios. These measures were designed to prevent any overlap between public office duties and private gains.
This foundational principle has met a significant challenge with the presidency of Donald Trump. According to his latest financial disclosures, Trump reported remarkable gains of $2.2 billion in his first year back in office, with an astonishing $1.4 billion attributed solely to cryptocurrency investments. The concern extends beyond the sheer magnitude of these earnings; rather, it lies in the fact that these profits intersect with industries regulated by his administration, foreign relations under his control, and economic conditions that can dramatically fluctuate based on executive decisions.
Unlike Trump, most Americans cannot afford to hedge their bets through the buying and selling of oil company stocks.
Despite claims from the White House that no conflicts of interest exist and assertions from Trump regarding the independence of his investment management, evidence suggests that he is uniquely profiting from his role as president in ways that are unprecedented. A prominent case in point is his financial involvement in cryptocurrency, an area where his regulatory actions directly affect both the market and his personal investments. Since he resumed office, the Trump administration has adopted a notably lenient stance toward digital assets, promoting the U.S. as a potential crypto center, advocating for new regulations surrounding stablecoins, and stepping back from stringent actions against major crypto firms. As a result, Trump can strategically influence markets and regulations that will likely benefit his financial interests.
The current regulatory framework is lacking in its ability to protect American investors, which exposes them to potential scams and the unpredictability of speculative digital currencies. A stark illustration of this risk is Trump’s own meme coin, which has dramatically underperformed, plummeting by 97.7% from its peak value—leading to substantial losses for nearly a million investors, who collectively have lost approximately $3.8 billion, while Trump himself profited by $636 million from the venture.
Furthermore, the implications of these actions on foreign relations are equally concerning. Cryptocurrency transactions are often obscured by their inherent complexity, making the connections between Trump’s ventures and international finance hard to fully understand. For instance, in early 2025, a Trump family-supported venture launched a stablecoin dubbed USD1, which was later linked to a significant $2 billion investment by the United Arab Emirates in the crypto exchange Binance, raising questions about the ethical dimensions of such transactions. This circle illustrates how a foreign power is financing initiatives associated with a sitting president amid geopolitical tensions, including a contentious war initiated without congressional consent.
Congress has both the power and responsibility to act.
Throughout U.S. history, there has never been a president engaged in business dealings of this nature, especially with foreign entities. The framers of our Constitution anticipated the dangers of foreign influence, explicitly prohibiting such arrangements to safeguard against corruption. Previous warnings have highlighted that financial conflicts can skew judgment, compromise foreign policy, and lead to decisions that serve personal interests rather than the nation’s welfare.
