The CLARITY bill is reportedly expected to face its first Senate procedural vote as Representative Warren Davidson seeks removal of Section 305, though neither the vote's timing nor the remov
The CLARITY bill is reportedly expected to face its first Senate procedural vote as Representative Warren Davidson seeks removal of Section 305, though neither the vote's timing nor the removal request is confirmed by any primary document, even as the Senate-reported text of H.R. 3633 has already replaced the House version of Section 305 with a new "temporary hold" provision.
Both headline developments rest on unconfirmed reporting rather than an official Senate schedule or a public Davidson statement, according to the research available at press time. What is documented is the bill's status: H.R. 3633 was reported to the Senate by Mr. Scott of South Carolina with an amendment on June 1, 2026, and placed on the calendar as Calendar No. 423, per the Senate-reported text published by the U.S. Government Publishing Office. That is a document-stage fact, not confirmation of a scheduled floor vote. For related coverage, see Senate Keeps Clarity Act Alive With Crypto Bill Vote Set for September.
The bill is described as expected to face a first Senate procedural vote, but no date, motion type, vote threshold, or outcome has been established. A procedural step is distinct from final passage or enactment, and reporting a bill to the Senate calendar does not by itself schedule floor action. For related coverage, see Clarity Act Vote: Crypto and Community Banks Lobby Ahead.
The verifiable record extends only to the committee stage: the June 1, 2026 reporting of H.R. 3633 with an amendment. Coincu has separately tracked how the Senate kept the CLARITY Act alive and how it moved to open a first vote on the measure, but any specific procedural date remains unconfirmed in the primary evidence reviewed here.
Warren Davidson is reported to be seeking the removal of Section 305, according to unconfirmed reports; no original Davidson statement, filed amendment, or verified attribution was located in the research. His request should be read as a reported ask, not a completed change to the bill, and there is no evidence he controls Senate procedure or has filed a Senate amendment.
What Section 305 now contains depends on which version is read, a distinction that matters given the recent redraft covered in the Senate Republicans' updated CLARITY Act. In the Senate substitute, Section 305 is titled "Temporary hold for certain digital asset transactions," whereas the House-engrossed Section 305 instead concerns modernization of recordkeeping requirements, according to the House-engrossed text.
Under the Senate version, Section 305(a)(5) defines a temporary hold as a restriction delaying a digital-asset transaction, conversion, or withdrawal for a reasonable period not exceeding 30 calendar days, extendable for an additional 150 calendar days pursuant to a qualified written request.
Proposed initial temporary-hold ceiling
30 calendar days
In the June 1, 2026 Senate-reported substitute for H.R. 3633, Section 305(a)(5) defines an initial temporary hold as a reasonable period not exceeding 30 calendar days. An additional 150 calendar days is possible pursuant to a qualified written request. Proposed bill text, not enacted law. Source: U.S. Government Publishing Office.The 150-calendar-day extension is conditional on that qualified written request and is not automatic; it follows the initial hold rather than running alongside it.
Proposed conditional hold extension
150 additional calendar days
Section 305(a)(5) of the June 1, 2026 Senate-reported substitute permits an additional 150-calendar-day extension pursuant to a qualified written request. This extension follows the initial hold of up to 30 calendar days; it is not automatic. Proposed bill text, not enacted law. Source: U.S. Government Publishing Office.The provision covers permitted payment stablecoin issuers, qualifying foreign payment stablecoin issuers registered with the OCC, and digital asset service providers as defined in the GENIUS Act, under Section 305(a)(2). It pairs that scope with conditional protection from Federal or State private rights of action for good-faith holds based on a reasonable belief of a legal violation or a qualified agency request, subject to notification conditions and exceptions, under Section 305(b)(1).
Covered persons must retain documentation supporting a hold for the three-year period following its implementation and make it available to a covered agency or the FTC on request, under Section 305(b)(2). A construction clause in Section 305(d)(1) states the section does not compel covered persons to freeze, seize, or block assets beyond existing Federal or State law, while Section 305(c) separately addresses compliance with specified valid Federal court requirements concerning payment stablecoins.
The two headline items do not connect: an expected procedural vote does not establish passage, and a reported removal request does not establish revised text. There is no evidence that Section 305 delayed any vote, altered support, or became a condition for passage.
Committee reporting, placement on the Senate calendar, a procedural floor vote, and final passage are distinct stages, and only the first two are documented. The Section 305 terms above are provisions of the June 1, 2026 proposed version, not enacted law or confirmed final floor language.
Coin Center's May 14, 2026 statement, authored by Peter Van Valkenburgh, Jason Somensatto, and Lizandro Pieper, welcomed the bill's advancement through Senate Banking with the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act included and warned that later negotiations could strip developer protections.
The legislative process is not over, and there will undoubtedly be more debate before the Senate votes on final passage. But today's outcome preserves the core protections Coin Center has fought for from the beginning. — Peter Van Valkenburgh, Jason Somensatto and Lizandro Pieper, Coin Center
Concrete items to monitor include official confirmation of any Senate procedural step and its result, and a verified statement or text change addressing Section 305. Readers tracking the lobbying dynamics can follow how crypto firms and community banks are positioning ahead of a procedural vote, while the DeFi-specific stakes appear in the CLARITY Act update proposing CFTC registration for DeFi.
The available information gives no confirmed date. H.R. 3633 was reported to the Senate calendar on June 1, 2026, but that does not schedule a floor vote, and the reported "expected" vote is unverified.
Warren Davidson is reported to be seeking removal of Section 305, according to unconfirmed reports. No original statement or filed amendment confirming the request was located.
No. The available information establishes a reported request, not an adopted removal. As of the June 1, 2026 Senate-reported text, Section 305 remains in the bill as the "temporary hold" provision.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency and digital asset markets carry significant risk. Always do your own research before making decisions.
The post CLARITY Bill Senate Vote Expected; Davidson Targets Section 305 was initially published on Coincu.
