Connecticut MPs unanimously passed a bill, which banned state and local government divisions from accepting cryptocurrency payments and keeping crypto property.
House Bill 7082, titled “Money Transmission States, State Payments and Investments in Virtual Mudra (…) An Act related to various amendments,” bipartisan support was and was and was and was and was. Put signature on In the law on Tuesday.
The bill document determines that “neither the state nor any political subdivision of the state” will accept payment in cryptocurrency or buy crypto property.
The law also prevents the connecting state from establishing the Crypto Asset Reserve, which is one of the few American states that have clearly rejected the idea of the Crypto Asset Reserve.
Democrats pushed the bill
In February 2025, the first was presented by the Joint Committee of Connecticut on banking, selected by Democrats, including state representative Kane Gakar, Senator Petricia Miller and Senator Matthew Lace.
Since the first vote in May, the Bill has received extensive support from the House, with 105 votes supporting the bill and only 42 MPs have voted against it in one vote on 14 May.
The latest route came in favor of bills and 148 votes in favor of zero opponents, with three restraints.
Some online commentator Quoted The Democratic Party’s significant majority in Connecticut unanimously as the leading driver of the vote, especially among the widespread criticism of President Donald Trump’s memcoin and participation with digital assets.
Connected: Crypto Asset Reserve Bill Land in Ukraine’s Parliament
A related proposal, modern emoluments and malfeasance enforcement act, or Meme Act, aims to prevent federal officials from using their positions.
The ban “does nothing of matter”
According For some online industry supervisors, the restriction of connecticat on crypto investment by the state is inspired by volatility and regulation, but it can become a barrier to innovation.
On the other hand, Brogan Law founder Aaron Brogan told Coinlagraph that the ban “does nothing of the substance”, and indicates that “some of the democrats are polarized against the worst cryptocurrency industry,” there is a possibility of his association with Trump.
Brogan said, “It is indicating that the Connecticut is symbolically opposed to cryptocurrency, and for all the states that have established bitcoin reserves,” Brogan said:
“State Legislative Assembly loves to ban things that were not happening anyway because it actually makes headlines without the problem of result in the real world.”
Brogan also said that the Connecticut Governor still has to sign the law and has pointed to additional disclosure requirements targeting money transmitters in the private sector.
“This can probably be expensive, and can bise off professional practices for some online applications of California’s privacy laws,” he said.
Growing list of states rejecting bitcoin reserves
Under the Trump administration, there is an increase in the number of US states considering bitcoin (BTC) reserved proposals, with the number of strategic bitcoin reserve (SBR) bill 31, According For data from bitcoin laws.
Connecticut, however, is not alone in rejecting such an initiative, with MPs in five states – Montana, Vyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota and Pennsylvania – SBR bills were killed in February alone.
In March, Utah’s Senate passed a bitcoin bill, but amended to remove a section that would have authorized the treasurer of the state to invest in bitcoin. Oklahoma state also followed as Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee in April rejected An SBR proposal in 6-5 votes.
The list of states rejected by Bitcoin reserve-related bills continued to grow in May, Florida postponed its SBR bill indefinitely in early May and the Governor of Arizona vetoed two crypto bills.
magazine: US risk due to ‘front run’ by other countries on bitcoin reserve: Samson Mav
