Connect with us

Crypto World

Kevin O’Leary says Congress will revisit Clarity next year as crypto tax bill advances

Published

on

Kevin O’Leary says Congress will revisit Clarity next year as crypto tax bill advances

Shark Tank host and veteran investor Kevin O’Leary said he’s convinced the Clarity Act will eventually advance in the Senate and could return as soon as the first quarter of next year.

Speaking at the Avalanche Summit in New York on Thursday, O’Leary said he didn’t expect the bill to advance on Tuesday, when it received 49 of the 60 Senate votes needed to proceed.

“The chances of Clarity passing, in my view, were zero, and that’s what happened,” O’Leary said.

The legislation sought to establish a broader federal framework for crypto markets, including the roles of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

Advertisement

But O’Leary sees the failed vote as a delay rather than the end of the bill. He pointed to a separate crypto tax bill that advanced in the House this week as one reason he believes lawmakers will ultimately have to return to the issue of market structure.

The House Ways and Means Committee advanced the Digital Asset Tax Certainty Act, which seeks to establish tax rules for areas including staking, mining, small crypto transactions and broker requirements.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Why Meta's Zuckerberg, Nvidia's Huang Say An AI Slowdown Is Not Needed

Published

on

Meta Stock Climbs After Muse Glimmer Open-Source Release, Zuckerberg Blog

Why Meta's Zuckerberg, Nvidia's Huang Say An AI Slowdown Is Not Needed

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Bitcoin holds near $76.5K as stocks rebound after Fed rate move

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

Bitcoin hovered near $76,500 in the hours after Wall Street opened, as a rebound in U.S. equities helped ease pressure on risk assets following the latest Federal Reserve decision. The move came after BTC slipped below $76,000 during the initial reaction to the Fed’s 25-basis-point increase in benchmark rates.

For traders, the key dynamic was less about a new burst of buying and more about stabilization: volatility appeared to cool over the prior 24 hours, liquidity around current levels thickened, and on-chain sentiment signals remained supportive—though not at peak “bullish conditions.”

Key takeaways

  • BTC held close to $76,500 after consolidating following a dip below $76,000 tied to a 0.25% Fed rate hike.
  • U.S. stocks rebounded, with the Nasdaq Composite up 1.5% and the S&P 500 gaining 0.9%, helping sentiment across high-beta markets.
  • TradingView data pointed to cooling BTC volatility and only modest price moves, consistent with range trading.
  • CryptoQuant’s Bull Score Index fell to around 60/100—still labeled “bullish,” but below levels associated with stronger momentum.

Range trading returns as equities find a bid

BTC’s near-term behavior looked more controlled than directional. According to TradingView, volatility eased over the last day, while price action largely stayed within the bounds needed to interact with nearby liquidity rather than driving a breakout or breakdown.

CoinGlass data also suggested a typical “two-sided” market: bid and ask liquidity thickened around spot levels, a pattern frequently associated with consolidation. In practical terms, this often means fewer aggressive liquidations and less forced repositioning—conditions that can keep traders from chasing until a catalyst reappears.

That catalyst, in this case, was partly external. U.S. equities turned higher after a policy-driven wobble, with major indexes finishing the day up on the session. The S&P 500 gained 0.9% and the Nasdaq Composite rose 1.5%, giving risk markets a fresh footing.

Advertisement

The Fed decision landed the day before: on Wednesday, it voted to increase benchmark interest rates by 25 basis points to 3.75%–4.0%, its first hike since July 2023. The move ended a long stretch in which the Fed had either cut rates or held them steady across prior meetings.

Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph highlighted the broader cross-market tone, noting that central-bank rates have been rising globally. In that context, the Fed’s shift fits a wider pattern: the European Central Bank delivered a 0.25% hike last week, and the Bank of Japan was expected to follow on Friday.

The Kobeissi Letter argued that assets could still perform well even if rate hikes tighten liquidity conditions, pointing to the Nasdaq’s gains as an example.

On-chain analytics: bullish trend remains, momentum fades

Bitcoin’s recent trajectory has been uneven. The article noted that after a Tuesday selloff—when BTC/USD hit new month-to-date lows—Bitcoin bounced, trading about 0.5% higher at the time of writing.

But the question for investors is whether that rebound is just pausing or actually restarting. CryptoQuant, in its latest weekly research shared with Cointelegraph, framed current conditions as supportive on the longer arc while less favorable for near-term momentum.

Advertisement

CryptoQuant’s head of research, Julio Moreno, said the trend is still bullish, yet macro factors and fading demand are weighing on continuation. He pointed to one of CryptoQuant’s proprietary measures: the Bull Score Index, which gauges whether market conditions fit CryptoQuant’s definition of “bullish” phases.

Moreno noted that the Bull Score Index had fallen from 80 to 60. While 60 sits at the threshold CryptoQuant uses to describe “bullish conditions,” it is also a clear step down from the higher-score environment that typically aligns with stronger momentum. In CryptoQuant’s view, this is why Bitcoin may look like it’s holding the floor without immediately resuming a sustained advance.

In the same report, CryptoQuant summarized the takeaway as “cooling, not turning.” The firm maintained that a Bull Score of 60 keeps the trend bullish, but it highlighted several offsetting pressures: fading U.S. demand, rising inflows into altcoins, and a week of macro risk that includes the delay of the CLARITY Act and the expectation of a Fed hike.

The practical implication is that investors may need to prepare for consolidation rather than assume the prior rebound automatically extends. CryptoQuant also identified levels to watch: $70,000 and the $62,000–$65,000 band as potential support zones.

Advertisement

What traders should watch next in a tightening-liquidity regime

The market is now digesting a key shift: the Fed has moved back into the hiking cycle after a pause period that spanned roughly three years of easing or rate holds. That matters because higher rates can change how capital flows across asset classes—often first through liquidity expectations and then through risk appetite.

Still, the immediate tape showed that equities can quickly swing back, and when that happens Bitcoin tends to respond as part of the broader risk complex. The combination of reduced volatility on the TradingView feed and thickening liquidity near spot suggests there is no urgent technical breakdown at the moment.

For participants, the next layer is monitoring whether the on-chain trend can stabilize despite macro headwinds. CryptoQuant’s Bull Score hovering around its “bullish conditions” cutoff is a reminder that the market’s internal momentum is no longer as strong as during earlier phases.

Looking ahead, the most important signals will likely be whether BTC can reclaim upside momentum without a fresh wave of macro pressure, and whether support zones identified by CryptoQuant hold if consolidation deepens. If liquidity conditions tighten again or equity volatility returns, Bitcoin’s range could widen rather than resolve cleanly.

Advertisement

Readers should watch how the Bull Score Index develops from this threshold area and whether $70,000 and the $62,000–$65,000 support band stay intact as the market continues to weigh central-bank policy expectations.

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Is Being Indian a Fraud Signal? Arc Traders Sold Like It Is

Published

on

Is Being Indian a Fraud Signal? Arc Traders Sold Like It Is

Tokens on Circle’s new Arc blockchain fell in the past 24 hours after traders said they sold because a builder on the mainnet launch livestream appeared to be Indian. The man in the clip does not work for Circle.

Panchu Vijay Pal runs XyloNet, a third-party stablecoin exchange that Circle’s Arc team featured as a partner in June. Traders sold tokens he has no connection to, on a chain whose block producers include BlackRock, Visa, and Mastercard.

Why Did One Guest Segment Move an Entire Chain?

Circle opened Arc’s public mainnet on Wednesday with a broadcast from New York. The main stage carried keynotes from CEO Jeremy Allaire and roundtables with BlackRock, DTCC, and Aave. A Developer Pre-Show ran earlier, billed as partner highlights and community drop-ins.

Pal appeared in that pre-show from a home setup with a gaming chair behind him. A screenshot spread on X within the hour, where one trader, KR, told 764,000 viewers he had exited.

Advertisement

The tokens that fell were launchpad and meme assets, not anything issued by Circle. No ARC token trades yet. GeckoTerminal data on Thursday showed TOLLY down roughly 68% and ARGUS down roughly 50%.

TOLLY Price Performance. Source: GeckoTerminal

Speculators had spent weeks positioning for a meme coin rush on Arc. Launchpads generated 82% of the chain’s $410.8 million first-day DEX volume, and the first selling wave arrived over a face rather than a fundamental.

Does the Data Behind the Stereotype Exist?

Replies to the clip escalated from mockery to dehumanizing slurs aimed at Indians as a group. Crypto opinion leader, “Crypto with Khan” pushed back, listing Indian-born CEOs at Google, Microsoft, IBM, and Adobe. Alphractal founder Joao Wedson quoted him with a longer rebuttal.

“Bias and racism are still very visible on X, especially in the crypto market. When innovation comes from the U.S. or Europe, it is often treated with credibility by default. When it comes from Asia, the reaction is frequently much more skeptical,” Wedson posted on Thursday.

Khan followed on Thursday with a ranking of the ten largest crypto frauds by country of origin, which he said he produced by asking an AI chatbot. FTX, PlusToken, OneCoin, and Africrypt topped it.

Advertisement

Furthermore, Chainalysis’s 2026 Crypto Crime Report attributes more than $2 billion in 2025 theft to North Korean state hackers, including the $1.5 billion Bybit breach. It traces pig-butchering fraud to compounds in Cambodia and Myanmar.

Circle’s Arc team held up XyloNet as a model project in a June partner spotlight. On launch day, the chain’s traders held up its founder as a reason to sell. Both were the same company’s audience.

XyloNet went live on Arc mainnet this week regardless. The tokens that sold off in Pal’s name were never his to begin with.

Advertisement

The post Is Being Indian a Fraud Signal? Arc Traders Sold Like It Is appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

CFTC Broadens Regulatory Relief for Passive Trading Software Firms

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has taken another step toward accommodating blockchain and crypto apps that simply provide technical access to regulated derivatives venues. In a no-action position issued Thursday, the agency said it would not recommend enforcement against qualifying “passive software” providers—or their personnel—for failing to register as introducing brokers or associated persons, so long as the software meets specific conditions.

The move matters for crypto builders because it creates a clearer path for non-custodial wallets and other software applications to connect users to CFTC-registered firms and exchanges offering products such as perpetual contracts and prediction markets, without automatically pulling the software provider into full broker registration.

Key takeaways

  • The CFTC’s Thursday no-action position covers providers of “passive software” that connect users to CFTC-registered derivatives firms and exchanges.
  • Qualifying providers would not face enforcement for not registering as introducing brokers or associated persons, if they stay within limits on how they handle user orders.
  • The guidance builds on a March no-action letter granted to Phantom Technologies for self-custodial wallet software.
  • The regulatory action arrives shortly after the CLARITY Act failed to advance in the Senate, signaling agencies intend to keep moving under existing authority.

A narrower role that reduces registration risk

At the core of the CFTC’s relief is a concept regulators often draw around broker-type activity: where the provider’s software and marketing functions do not cross into exercising discretion over trading decisions. According to the CFTC’s no-action position, the Market Participants Division will not recommend enforcement against providers that qualify under the “passive software” framework for facilitating trading with CFTC-registered entities and exchanges.

To qualify, providers must meet conditions designed to limit their involvement in transactions—especially restrictions related to discretion over users’ orders. The practical effect is to distinguish between software that merely routes users to regulated venues versus software that actively decides, manages, or steers trades on the user’s behalf.

This distinction is particularly relevant for crypto wallets and app-layer products that users interact with directly. If an app can demonstrate that it is not effectively operating like a registered intermediary, it may be able to integrate regulated derivatives access while reducing the compliance burden that typically comes with broker registration.

Advertisement

Extending a precedent set by Phantom

The CFTC’s new stance is not happening in a vacuum. Earlier, the agency granted a similar no-action position in March to Phantom Technologies for its self-custodial crypto wallet software. That letter allowed Phantom, subject to certain conditions, to provide and market software that connects users with registered futures brokers and exchanges without requiring Phantom to register as an introducing broker.

By expanding the relief beyond a single wallet vendor, the CFTC appears to be moving from case-by-case comfort toward a more repeatable standard that other developers can evaluate against. For investors and industry participants, this matters because regulatory certainty is often less about whether the rules can be interpreted, and more about whether firms can plan product roadmaps without waiting for the regulator to address each new integration individually.

The earlier Phantom-related effort also did not remain purely theoretical. The Phantom and Hyperliquid Policy Center later urged the CFTC to modernize how the rules apply to onchain infrastructure—arguing that non-custodial wallet providers should receive clearer protections from introducing broker requirements and that the agency should clarify how existing regulations operate when blockchain developers facilitate access to regulated derivatives venues.

While Tuesday’s details are limited to what the no-action position covers, the direction is clear: regulators are acknowledging that the technical layer of trading—software connectivity—can exist without necessarily replicating the role of a traditional broker.

Advertisement

After CLARITY Act setback, agencies continue

The CFTC’s relief comes two days after the CLARITY Act failed to advance in the U.S. Senate. As reported in earlier coverage of the legislative outcome, a cloture motion received 49 votes, falling short of the 60 needed to proceed to debate.

Following that setback, both CFTC Chair Michael Selig and Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins signaled that their agencies would continue regulatory work using existing authority. In posts on X referenced by the reporting, Selig said the CFTC is “ready to ship its rules,” while Atkins said the SEC would act “with or without legislation” to provide regulatory certainty for digital assets.

Thursday’s developments follow through on that posture. Alongside the CFTC no-action position, the SEC approved a temporary exemption allowing qualifying platforms to facilitate limited onchain trading of tokenized U.S. stocks through permissioned automated market makers and liquidity pools. The pairing of actions—CFTC on derivatives access software, SEC on a narrowly defined pathway for tokenized stock trading—suggests regulators are pursuing targeted certainty even as comprehensive legislation stalls.

Still, the scope of this new no-action relief is not blanket. The CFTC’s conditions and discretion limits are key: “passive” software is not a synonym for “anything goes.” Builders will need to ensure their product behavior aligns with the framework, particularly around what the software does (and does not do) with respect to order handling.

Advertisement

What to watch next for wallet and onchain derivatives access

For developers, the most immediate takeaway is to treat the no-action position as a blueprint for compliance planning. Since the CFTC’s relief hinges on meeting specific conditions—especially those related to discretion—teams integrating regulated derivatives access should document how their software operates, what actions are user-driven, and what guardrails prevent the app from effectively acting like a broker.

For users and market participants, the broader question is how quickly regulated-derivatives access becomes more “app-like.” The CFTC is signaling that non-custodial connectivity to CFTC-registered venues can fit within existing regulatory boundaries when structured appropriately. The open issue is how tightly the framework will be interpreted in edge cases, such as more interactive order workflows, automated strategies, or features that could be viewed as steering trades.

Readers should watch whether additional CFTC communications expand “passive software” guidance to more product categories, and how firms demonstrate compliance with the discretion and order-handling limits as onchain interfaces for regulated derivatives continue to evolve.

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Arc Blockchain Explained: Everything You Need to Know About Circle’s Layer 1

Published

on

Arc is a purpose-built, EVM-compatible Layer 1 blockchain being built by Circle, the company that’s behind the second-largest stablecoin in the industry, USDC. It’s designed specifically for stablecoin finance.

The protocol was first announced in August 2025, and its public testnet went live in October of that year. Arc has received the backing of major Wall Street heavyweights like BlackRock, Visa, MasterCard, and more.

It was created to provide blockchain infrastructure that’s specifically tailored to payments, foreign exchange, tokenized assets, capital markets, and other forms of on-chain financial activity.

If you’re wondering what the difference is between an EVM-compatible Layer 1 blockchain and an Ethereum layer-two like Robinhood Chain, it’s that Arc is a dedicated, standalone blockchain that settles its own transactions and implements its own security protocols. Layer-two blockchains, by contrast, rely on Ethereum for settlement, finality, and security. That said, EVM compatibility also means that developers can use familiar tools and Solidity-based smart contracts. Its design tackles several friction points that Circle sees in existing blockchain infrastructure, including volatile gas costs, unpredictable settlement times, and the lack of privacy that’s actually required for many conventional financial transactions.

Advertisement

Arc, therefore, combines USDC-denominated gas, predictable transaction fees, deterministic sub-second finality, and a permissioned validator network.

For a complete technical overview, review the project’s whitepaper or litepaper.

Main Takeaways

  • Arc is an independent Layer 1 blockchain built by Circle, first announced in August 2025.
  • It is built specifically for stablecoin finance, with payments, FX, tokenized assets, and capital markets touted as main use cases.
  • USDC is used to pay gas fees, giving users a dollar-denominated transaction cost rather than a volatile crypto asset.
  • It offers deterministic sub-second finality, making settlement predictable and fast.
  • Arc is EVM-compatible. This means that developers can use existing Ethereum-first tooling and Solidity-based smart contracts.
  • Privacy is a core part of Arc’s architecture.

Arc’s Role in Circle’s Strategy

Arc represents a major expansion effort in Circle’s startegy when it comes to the stablecoin economy. The company is best known as the issuer of USDC – the second-largest stablecoin in circulation. However, it has also built infrastructure for moving and using stablecoins across blockchain networks, including products such as Circle Mint, CCTP, Gateway, and more. With Arc, the firm is moving further down this road by delivering the underlying blockchain and settlement infrastructure on which financial applications can properly operate.

The move also reflects the company’s position that stablecoins have outgrown some of the infrastructure that they used to rely on. According to Arc’s litepaper document, existing public blockchains can create problems when it comes to institutional financial activity through volatile costs of gas, uncertain settlement finality, limited transaction privacy, as well as fragmented liquidity across the various protocols. Arc, therefore, comes into the picture specifically to address those shortcomings rather than attempting to compete primarily for existing crypto activity.

This makes the blockchain complementary to Circle’s existing products as opposed to being a replacement for them. The network is designed specifically to connect with Circle’s wider platform, other blockchains, traditional fiat rails, as well as the broader ecosystem of tokenized assets and stablecoins.

Advertisement

How Arc is Built

The first and foremost concept that you need to understand about Arc is that it’s an independent Layer 1 blockchain. This means that it has its very own consensus system and validator network. It does not rely on settling transactions through Ethereum. At the same time, though, it is EVM-compatible. This means that developers are able to use existing and familiar Ethereum-oriented tooling and write smart contracts in Solidity without having to learn an entirely new programming environment.

At the core of the network is Malachite – this is a high-performance consensus engine that’s based on Tendermint. Arc uses a permissioned group of validators to agree on the order and validity of transactions. In simple terms, these validators are responsible for keeping the network synchronized and confirming which transactions become a valid part of the blockchain.

One of the main design goals behind the protocol is fast and predictable settlement. Its consensus system is designed to provide deterministic finality in under one second. What this means is that once a transaction is finalized, users won’t have to wait for several additional blocks to gain confidence that it will not be reversed.

Arc is also built around financial applications specifically. Its architecture supports stablecoins and tokenized assets. It also connects with different products already launched by Circle, as mentioned above, including Mint, CCTP, and Gateway.

Advertisement

how_arc_is_built_image

The Stablecoin-Native Model: USDC Gas, Fees and Network Economics

One of the most distinctive features of Arc is that USDC is being used as the native asset for transaction fees. Now, as you may know, on many other blockchains, users have to hold a separate cryptocurrency (such as ETH or SOL) to pay for gas. This means that the dollar cost of a transaction can change not only because the network becomes busier, but also because the price of the gas token itself moves. Arc removes that second source of volatility by denominating its gas fees in USDC.

The goal is to make blockchain costs easier for businesses to understand and, by extension, to budget for. Because USDC is a stablecoin pegged 1:1 to the US dollar, Arc can manage its fee market directly in a stable unit of account. In simple and practical terms, the asset being transferred and the asset used to pay for the transaction itself can both be denominated in USD.

Arc’s fee system takes inspiration from a very popular Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP) number 1559, but it also adds a smoothing mechanism. Instead of charging the base fee sharply from one block to the next, Arc uses an exponentially weighted moving average of network utilization together with a bounded base fee. The goal here is to reduce short-term fee spikes and keep transaction costs a lot more predictable.

USDC, however, is not intended to be the only way users can cover fees forever. Arc’s design also supports other local stablecoins and tokenized fiat currencies through a paymaster infrastructure, which allows applications to abstract gas payments away from users. The fees that are collected by the network are being directed to an on-chain Arc Treasury. According to the litepaper, this will be used to support the long-term growth of the network.

Advertisement

Arc’s Core Product Stack: Payments, FX, Privacy and Interoperability

At this point, it should have become clear that Arc is designed to be more than just a blockchain to facilitate USDC transfers. Its broader aim is to provide the infrastructure that’s needed for programmable financial applications, with payments, FX, privacy, and connectivity to other financial systems forming some very important parts of its ecosystem.

Let’s break these down.

Payments

Arc is optimized for stablecoin-based payments. Fast finality and predictable fees can make settlement a lot easier to manage. Circle positions use cases such as global and cross-border payments as a core application of the network.

Foreign Exchange

The blockchain is also built to support programmable foreign exchange. This would allow stablecoins representing different currencies to be exchanged and settled on-chain. The Arc website specifically highlights. the potential for 24/7 on-chain forex markets.

Advertisement

Privacy

The team is building something called Arc Privacy Sector (APS). It’s designed to add confidential smart-contract execution alongside the blockchain’s public environment. This could allow certain sensitive information, including balances, transaction details, and contract state, to essentially remain private while applications continue to execute on-chain. The privacy whitepaper highlights potential applications such as payroll, lending, asset issuance, and repo markets.

Interoperability

Last but not least, Arc is not intended to operate as an isolated protocol. Its architecture connects the network with traditional fiat rails, other applications, blockchains, as well as existing protocols built by Circle as we explained above.

What Will Actually Be Built on Arc?

There isn’t a limit on the type of applications that can be built on top of Arc’s blockchain, but it has to have become obvious by now that it’s designed around financial applications, rather than a single flagship use case. Its architecture is specifically intended to support products that move, exchange, and program stablecoins and real-world asset tokenization. As you can see, these are all segments where predictable fees, privacy, quick finality and settlement matter.

Some of the main use cases that are highlighted across various materials that Arc’s team has published include:

Advertisement
  • Global and cross-border payments
  • Foreign exchange
  • Tokenized assets
  • Treasury and liquidity management
  • Lending and credit
  • Institutional markets

That isn’t to say that we won’t see meme coins running on Arc. In fact, since its public launch on September 16th, the network has already seen its fair share of meme coins being built through various launchpads. But as you can see, all the above applications are very closely related. A business, for example, that receives a stablecoin payment, might immediately exchange it into another currency, use it as collateral, or move it to another blockchain – all through programmable infrastructure.

That interconnected model is very central to the protocol’s value proposition. Rather than functioning simply as a faster network for USDC transfers, Arc is intended to become a financial settlement environment where various applications can operate on the same underlying infrastructure stack.

The Arc Ecosystem at Launch

With all of the above in mind, Arc launched with an ecosystem that spans financial institutions, payment companies, stablecoin issuers, DeFi protocols, custody providers, infrastructure firms, and developer tools. That depth is important to Circle’s strategy – rather than launching the network first and trying to attract liquidity and applications later, Arc is intended to kick it off with many of the building blocks already connected.

At the network level, Arc’s founding validators include institutions such as BlackRock, DTCC, Galaxy, ICE, Mastercard, MoneyGram, SBI Group, Sumitomo Corporation, Visa, Standard Chartered, and more. These organizations don’t just participate as application partners but also operate and secure the network itself.

Beyond that, the official release also listed multiple custody providers, including Anchorage, BitGo, Copper, Fireblocks, and Zodia Custody. The release also mentioned compliance-oriented and security providers such as TRM Labs, Elliptic, and Chainalysis, as well as cross-chain protocols such as LayerZero, Stargate, and more.

Advertisement

The result is a developed ecosystem that’s designed for immediate utility.

Arc vs. the Competition

Arc is entering a crowded market – there’s no denying that. Countless Layer 1 and Layer 2 blockchains exist, but Circle’s initiative is deliberately different. Rather than competing for general-purpose crypto activity alone, Arc is designed around stablecoin payments and institutional settlement. In fact, even the litepaper says that the goal is not just to capture transactions from existing networks, but to bring more financial activity on-chain.

That said, the main differences really come down to a handful of design and approach choices.

  • Stablecoin-native gas payments: As we outlined above, many blockchains require users to pay fees in a volatile native token. Arc, instead, uses USDC for gas. This means that transaction costs are denominated in a relatively stable unit of account. Arc also uses a fee-smoothing mechanism that’s intended to reduce short-term fluctuations in network fees.
  • Deterministic finality: Arc uses Malachite, which is a Tendermint-based BFT consensus engine. Once more than two-thirds of validators commit a block, transactions become final rather than passing through a longer period of probabilistic or economic finality. Arc contrasts this with the finality models that are used by networks such as Ethereum and various Ethereum L2s.
  • Finance-specific infrastructure: Arc combines its base layer with existing Circle infrastructure and is designed around payments, FX, tokenized assets, and opt-in privacy (eventually).
  • A permissioned validator model: Unlike permissionless networks where anyone who meets the protocol’s set of requirements can potentially become a validator, Arc relies on a limited set of known institutions.

Ultimately, Arc makes different trade-offs than many general-purpose chains: it emphasizes stable costs, settlement certainty, and infrastructure tailored to regulated financial activity over permissionless validation.

Frequently Asked Questions

When was Arc mainnet launched?

Arc’s public mainnet was launched on September 16. It is an independent Layer 1 blockchain with its own validator network and consensus system. It is EVM-compatible, which means developers can still use Solidity and familiar Ethereum tools.

Advertisement

Does Arc have a native token?

Yes. The protocol has minted the entire supply of ARC, but it is not in circulation at the time of this writing in September 2026. However, the fees are denominated in USDC.

Why does Arc use USDC for gas?

Using USDC allows transaction fees to be denominated in a stable dollar-based asset rather than a cryptocurrency whose market price can fluctuate significantly.

How fast is Arc?

Arc is designed to provide what is known as “deterministic finality” in under one second. Once the transaction is finalized by the network, users don’t need to wait for multiple additional blocks for settlement certainty.

Is Arc permissionless?

No. Applications and smart contracts can be built on Arc, but its validator network uses a permissioned model. Validators are selected institutions rather than an unrestricted group that anyone can join.

Advertisement

Does Arc support meme coins?

Yes, meme coins exist on the Arc blockchain. They have become a landmark for the entire cryptocurrency industry, and the fact that Arc is EVM-compatible means that developers can build launchpads and meme coins using existing and familiar tooling.

Does Arc support private transactions?

Arc’s Privacy Sector is designed to support confidential smart-contract execution alongside the public blockchain. This can allow sensitive transaction data and contract state to remain private, while still benefiting from blockchain-based settlement.

What can be built on Arc?

While Arc is designed primarily for financial applications, there isn’t a limit on what developers can build on the network. It can be used as a general-purpose L1.

How is Arc different from Ethereum?

Arc’s main differentiation is that it’s permissioned, fees are paid in USDC, its finality is a lot quicker, and more.

Advertisement

The post Arc Blockchain Explained: Everything You Need to Know About Circle’s Layer 1 appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Trump-Backed Republican Congresswoman Says the President’s Immigration Crackdown Has Gone ‘Too Far’

Published

on

Trump-Backed Republican Congresswoman Says the President’s Immigration Crackdown Has Gone ‘Too Far’

Salazar’s campaign said that the video released on Thursday is the first of multiple ads that it plans to run before the upcoming midterm elections, in which Salazar is facing off against Democratic nominee Eliott Rodríguez. Both Salazar and Rodríguez are Cuban American, and previously worked as journalists. 

The Cook Political Report indicates that Salazar, a three-term Congresswoman, is expected to hold on to her seat come November, rating it as “Likely Republican.”

In the district Salazar represents, the foreign-born population makes up more than 54% of the total population—one of the largest proportions of all the districts in the lower chamber.

Thursday’s ad isn’t the first time that Salazar has expressed concerns about the Trump Administration’s immigration enforcement efforts. Earlier this week, she responded to reports that Luis Galeano, an exiled Nicaraguan journalist whose U.S. asylum application has been pending for years, had been detained by federal immigration agents.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

CFTC Issues No-Action Position for Trading Software Providers

Published

on

CFTC Issues No-Action Position for Trading Software Providers

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has expanded regulatory relief for “passive software” providers that connect users to regulated derivatives firms and exchanges.

In a no-action position issued Thursday, the agency’s Market Participants Division said it would not recommend enforcement against qualifying providers or their personnel for failing to register as introducing brokers or associated persons when facilitating trading with CFTC-registered firms and exchanges.

The position could make it easier for crypto wallets and other apps to offer access to regulated derivatives, including perpetual contracts and prediction markets, without becoming CFTC-regulated introducing brokers themselves.

Source: CFTC

To qualify, providers must meet conditions limiting their role in transactions, including restrictions on exercising discretion over users’ orders.

Advertisement

The action extends a similar position granted to Phantom Technologies in March for its self-custodial crypto wallet software. The earlier letter allowed Phantom, subject to certain conditions, to provide and market software connecting users with registered futures brokers and exchanges without registering as an introducing broker.

Phantom and the Hyperliquid Policy Center also pushed for broader protections in July, asking the CFTC to shield non-custodial wallet providers from introducing broker requirements and clarify how existing rules apply to blockchain developers and regulated derivatives firms using onchain infrastructure.

Related: Bernstein expects ‘aggressive’ rulemaking from SEC, CFTC, following CLARITY Act failure

Regulators move quickly after CLARITY Act setback

The move from the US regulator comes two days after the CLARITY Act failed to advance in the Senate, with a cloture motion receiving 49 votes, short of the 60 needed to proceed to debate.

Advertisement

Following the vote, CFTC Chair Michael Selig and Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins signaled Wednesday that their agencies would continue moving forward on crypto regulation under their existing authority.

“The CFTC is locked in and ready to ship its rules for the new frontier of finance,” Selig said in a post on X, while Atkins said the SEC would act “with or without legislation” to provide regulatory certainty for digital assets.

Source: Paul Atkins

On Thursday, the agencies began following through. Alongside the CFTC’s no-action position, the SEC approved a temporary exemption allowing qualifying platforms to facilitate limited onchain trading of tokenized US stocks through permissioned automated market makers and liquidity pools.

Magazine: Is there any chance left to save the CLARITY Act?

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

A Genetic Mutation May Help Explain Lung Cancer in Nonsmokers

Published

on

A Genetic Mutation May Help Explain Lung Cancer in Nonsmokers

A few months later, his daughter, who is now 33, was diagnosed with melanoma in her ear and was asked about her family history of cancer. She joined a study and provided samples to look for markers of cancer, and while she did not carry many common cancer mutations, she did carry T790M. But for now, there are no evidence-based recommendations to follow when it comes to how she should be monitoring her lungs for signs of cancer. “That’s why I’m pushing for how we can screen younger people, knowing that she has a genetic risk, and what low-dose screening she should get,” says McKenna. “If something were to appear, she can catch it at an early stage, perhaps Stage I, and not go through Stage IV, because there are not as many options, and the outlook is not as positive.”

LoPiccolo is conducting a study, called INHERIT, which includes people from across the country with any inherited genetic risk for lung cancer, including the EGFR T790M mutation. Doctors will work with each participant to understand their family history of lung cancer, smoking history, genetic profile, and any environmental exposures that might contribute to lung cancer before coming up with a personalized plan for how often they should be screened with low-dose CT scans to look for cancer. “The goal is to use CT screening to detect lung cancer at the earliest, most curable stage when it can be removed or cured,” says LoPiccolo.

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

XRP falls below $1.30 as investor questions $81B value

Published

on

Who actually trades XRP? Korea and Japan order books

XRP has fallen below the key $1.30 level after losing 7.3% on Tuesday, while Dubai-based crypto investor Royal Kane has ruled out buying the token because of its $81 billion market value.

Summary

  • XRP has dropped 23% from its recent high near $1.68.
  • Royal Kane cited XRP’s large market capitalization in rejecting an investment.
  • The Federal Reserve raised interest rates by 25 basis points on Sep. 16.
  • The CLARITY Act failed to advance after a 50-49 Senate vote.

Royal Kane, a Dubai-based crypto investor, wrote on X that he would not invest in XRP at its present valuation, pointing to the token’s market capitalization as the main reason for his position.

“I would never invest in Ripple at this stage because its market cap is already too large,” Kane said.

Advertisement

Market data included in the source report placed XRP near $1.30, with a market capitalization of about $81.68 billion and 24-hour trading volume of $4.12 billion. The token was also down 29.18% since the start of 2026.

Kane argued that assets with lower valuations may offer more room to benefit from a strong investment story. He cited Solana’s earlier “Ethereum killer” label, the community growth surrounding Pepe, and Zcash’s adoption case as examples of narratives that attracted traders.

Rather than presenting a price target for XRP, he told investors to “find a coin with a compelling narrative for the coming years.”

Advertisement

XRP price has dropped 23% from its recent peak

Selling pressure has erased much of XRP’s latest rebound, pulling its price from a recent high near $1.68 to approximately $1.30. A move between the two levels amounts to a decline of about 23%.

The retreat followed a stronger period for XRP in August, when the token climbed from around $1 to a monthly high near $1.70. According to September escrow data, XRP gained 28.5% in August even after Ripple released 1 billion tokens from escrow on Sep. 1.

Ripple’s scheduled release was valued at about $1.38 billion at the time. The company historically returns much of each monthly allocation to escrow, limiting the amount that can enter circulation.

Institutional demand also supported the August rally. The report found that U.S. spot XRP exchange-traded funds attracted $153.55 million during the month, including $150.28 million over its final two weeks. XRP Ledger payment volume rose 521% in one week, driven by larger transfers rather than an increase in transaction count.

Advertisement

Price action has since reversed as traders have reacted to tighter U.S. monetary policy and another delay in federal crypto legislation. XRP fell 7.3% on Tuesday and traded around $1.31 after the Senate vote, according to figures cited in the source report.

Kane’s criticism focuses on XRP’s $81B valuation

At an estimated $81.68 billion, XRP’s market capitalization remains one of the largest in the digital asset market. Kane views that size as a limit on potential returns because the token would require substantial new capital to produce the percentage gains available to smaller assets.

His comments also included a claim that Ripple has “no products or revenue whatsoever.” Ripple is privately held and does not publish the same quarterly financial statements required from a U.S.-listed public company, leaving investors with less information about its revenue than they would receive from an exchange-listed business.

However, the company publicly operates several products and services. Its businesses include Ripple Payments, the RLUSD stablecoin, and Ripple Prime, the institutional brokerage formed after its acquisition of Hidden Road. Ripple has also announced custody and treasury services for corporate clients.

Advertisement

Kane’s investment thesis therefore separates XRP’s market value from his assessment of Ripple’s commercial operations. XRP is the native asset of the XRP Ledger, while Ripple is a private technology company that holds a substantial quantity of the token and develops services that can use the network.

The distinction matters because buying XRP does not provide equity ownership in Ripple, a claim on the company’s revenue or voting rights over its business. XRP holders instead gain exposure to the market price of the token, which can respond to network activity, liquidity, speculation, regulations, and Ripple-related developments.

Fed rate increase has raised pressure on risk assets

Macroeconomic conditions have added another source of uncertainty for XRP and other cryptocurrencies. On Sep. 16, the Federal Reserve raised its benchmark interest rate by 25 basis points, taking the target range to 3.75% to 4%.

The unanimous decision delivered the first U.S. rate increase since 2023. Projections released by the central bank showed that 12 of 18 officials expected additional increases during the year, according to the source report.

Advertisement

Higher interest rates can increase returns on U.S. government debt and money-market products, giving American investors more yield-bearing alternatives to cryptocurrencies. Digital assets do not provide a fixed return, and tighter financial conditions can reduce demand for speculative investments.

Before the decision, U.S. inflation data had strengthened expectations for a rate increase. As crypto.news previously reported, annual inflation reached 3.4% in August, while consumer prices rose 0.4% from the previous month.

Energy costs rose 2.1% during August, with gasoline prices climbing 3.9%. Core consumer prices, which exclude food and energy, increased 0.3% on the month, exceeding the 0.2% estimate cited in the report.

Prediction-market traders raised the probability of a quarter-point increase to 81% after the inflation release. Although such contracts represent wagers rather than official Fed guidance, their pricing showed that traders had largely prepared for higher borrowing costs before the meeting.

Advertisement

CLARITY Act defeat has left XRP policy questions open

Regulatory pressure increased on Sep. 15 when the U.S. Senate rejected cloture on the Digital Asset Market CLARITY Act. The motion received 49 votes in favor and 50 against, falling 11 votes short of the 60 needed to open formal debate.

The vote carried particular importance for XRP because the legislation would divide oversight responsibilities between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Its treatment of network tokens could affect how XRP and other crypto assets are classified in U.S. markets.

Hours before the vote, Senate Republicans circulated a revised 635-page draft that added language covering ancillary assets. The proposal described an ancillary asset as a network token whose value depends on the managerial or entrepreneurial work of an originator or a related party.

Under the draft’s wording, XRP could have been treated as a digital commodity in secondary-market transactions regardless of the quantity controlled by Ripple. The proposal did not receive enough support to move into debate, leaving the existing legal and regulatory framework in place.

Advertisement

XRP still benefits from the 2023 ruling by U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres, who found that Ripple’s programmatic XRP sales on public exchanges did not constitute securities transactions. The same ruling found that the company’s direct institutional sales violated securities law, creating different treatment based on how the tokens were offered.

Negotiations have not ended despite the failed vote. Seven Senate Democrats have since reopened CLARITY Act talks and said the rejected cloture motion was “not the end” of the legislative effort.

The Senate’s official roll call shows that 49 lawmakers supported advancing the measure while 50 opposed it, meaning any renewed attempt would require at least 11 additional votes to reach the cloture threshold.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Colin Kaepernick on Threats He Faced, His NFL Exile, and That Jay-Z Lyric

Published

on

Colin Kaepernick on Threats He Faced, His NFL Exile, and That Jay-Z Lyric
Colin Kaepernick speaks onstage during The Gordon Parks Foundation Awards Dinner and Auction on May 19, 2026 in New York City. —Noam Galai—Getty Images

Following a string of high-profile police shootings of Black men 10 years ago, San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick began protesting such incidents by sitting during the national anthem at preseason games. What began as a quiet action turned into a fevered national debate about freedom of expression, patriotism, and so much more. 

In Kaepernick’s new memoir, The Perilous Fight, the quarterback explains that his action was spontaneous. He wasn’t even in uniform on August 13, 2016, the first time he sat during the anthem. “I hadn’t given the anthem a second’s thought before I walked out onto the field that day, but it hit me in that moment that I should find a seat,” Kaepernick writes. “I didn’t want to stand up while that song was playing. Rosa Parks had refused to give up her seat on the bus to a white person in 1955. Muhammad Ali wouldn’t step forward when his name was called by the draft board for the Vietnam War in Louisville in 1967. Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised black-gloved fists in the air during the playing of the anthem at the 1968 Olympics. They didn’t like what they saw, the way this nation touted its commitment to justice and at the same time showed little interest in it, and they took action. Those inspiring Americans had the courage of their convictions and literally changed the world in the process.”

Kaepernick, despite leading the 49ers to the Super Bowl in 2013 and throwing 16 touchdown passes, against just four interceptions, for a bad 49ers team in 2016, hasn’t played in the NFL since that season. In 2019, he and former teammate Eric Reid, who joined Kaepernick in kneeling during the anthem, settled a collusion lawsuit against the NFL. In late August, a decade after he etched his name in history, Kaepernick sat down with TIME to talk about why he hasn’t spoken up much about his protests, his relationship with the anthem today, his differences with Jay-Z, and the state of policing in the United States. 

(This interview has been edited and condensed for length and clarity) 

You’ve released a book, The Perilous Fight. Why tell your story now?

Advertisement

One, it’s 10 years since the protest. I’ve gotten so many questions about why did I protest, what happened, what led up to it, the details behind the scenes of all of the moments. Not just the protest, but owners in the NFL, the conversations that were happening there, the workout in 2019 and all the things that transpired around that. Then also just the work that we’re doing directly in the communities. It felt like it was a great time to be able to go out, answer some of those questions, and also be able to give insight into how we build, how we move forward together. I think it’s especially critical in a moment like this.

The book starts with a harrowing incident of racial hostility involving the N word that you experienced as a child—one you weren’t comfortable sharing with your parents, who adopted you and are white. Why start there?

One of the reasons we wanted to start with that moment of going through the neighborhood, being tied to a rose tree, and the dynamic of not feeling comfortable telling my parents is it really sets the stage for the rest of the book, and sets the stage for the rest of my life. I had to navigate the realities that you face when you are Black in predominantly white spaces. I had so many questions around, “You lived a privileged life. Everything was all good. Middle-class white family. What are you upset about?” And from the outside looking in, I understand how it can look that way. But also the reality of the experience, and what I went through, is also something that’s important to put in context. 

You didn’t really do any interviews during the heat of 2016 and 2017, and in the aftermath. What was your thinking on not doing these types of interviews then?

Advertisement

Yeah, it’s interesting because I get both sides of that question. During the 2016 season, it was like, “Why are you talking so much? Be quiet.” As an NFL quarterback, you’re required to speak three times a week. So reporters can ask you whatever they would like. I’m happy to answer any questions as part of that. But post that moment, one thing I realized was, it felt like there was a very, very intentional effort to make me the sole figure, or the sole voice, of the movement. I thought it was important to create space for other voices to be able to step up. And one of the reasons that I thought that approach was so important is looking back historically, yes, we need strong leaders, but we need strong people collectively. That’s actually what allows us to be able to sustain over time. Also, as part of that, I thought it was very important as they were very intentional attacks to try to discredit me, discredit what I was capable of on the field, discredit my character. In those efforts of trying to discredit me, they were also trying to discredit the broader movement.

Colin Kaepernick kneels during the national anthem flanked by Eli Harold, left, and Eric Reid, right, before an NFL game against the Dallas Cowboys in Santa Clara, Calif. on Oct. 2, 2016. —Marcio Jose Sanchez—AP

If there’s one athlete who has stepped up in the way that you wanted, who would that be?

I think there are voices across the board that have stepped up. I would say my brother Eric Reid. I’m always going to bring him up. Love Eric. He continued the protest after I was blackballed. He himself went through the same reality. His final season, [he] went out, set two franchise records, was cut, and never saw the field again. We had voices throughout the NBA step up. Whether that was LeBron, we saw Steph Curry, we saw Carmelo, we saw KD, all stepping to the forefront. We saw this with Megan Rapinoe, doing that on an international stage. We’re seeing it to this day throughout Europe. I would not have had the insight that this would have had the lasting impact internationally the way it does, and that’s just within the sports realm. More broadly, what I think it’s done is created opportunities, whether it is on a national stage, international stage, or within local communities. People saying, “Oh, this actually opened the door for me to be able to do the work in a way I previously wasn’t able to.”

In 2016, when you first started sitting, and then kneeling, during the national anthem, you’re in this national spotlight and firestorm. Was there one surreal moment you experienced that we didn’t see during this time? 

One surreal moment early on, we had a high school, Castlemont in Oakland. After I took a knee, they went out the next week and took a knee, and I went to go visit them the following week at their game. I had a moment where I was in the locker room with them before the game. They’re hyping each other up. It’s going to be a big game for them. And one of the players says, “We don’t get to eat at home. So we’re going to go eat on this field.”

Advertisement

That is too often a reality within communities. Not only navigating threats against their life, but navigating whether or not they’re even going to have a meal. For me, that was such a surreal moment that athletes in high school and students in high school are going out, trying to chase their dreams and compete at the highest level. They are willing to stand up and risk themselves to go out and advocate for their community, while at the same time not knowing whether or not they’re going to have a meal when they get home. That really encapsulated and painted a surreal picture of how dire this is. While the broader national conversation was happening, this is just the reality on the ground. 

Were you physically or psychologically threatened while protesting? 

Threats became so normalized that I didn’t really think about them too much. You get attacked from the President of the United States. You’re getting attacked from senators. You have people trying to send bombs to your home. Online threats and mail threats. My now wife Nessa, as I was getting these threats, was like, “You can’t be staying at your house alone.” She was in New York at the time. But that ultimately led to me staying at [manager Tony Ng’s] house for the rest of that 2016 season, just so people didn’t know where I was at. 

Were you ever scared? 

Advertisement

No. I also think you get a little bit of the football mentality. If someone is going to try to do something, they’re either going to try to do it or aren’t. My responsibility is to be prepared for whatever that is. 

Did you ever worry that what happened to you served as a warning to other athletes? That as a result of you not playing in the NFL anymore, they were quiet rather than speaking up?

Absolutely. I know the intention was to send that message: If you try to advocate for the Black community, if you try to fight against the status quo and create a different and better environment, we will take everything we can from you. And this actually showed up in one of our Know Your Rights camps in Las Vegas. One of our young high school students pulled me aside in the middle of the camp. “Hey, I really love football. I also really want to fight for my community and for that to be better. Which one do you think I should choose?” 

The fact that they have made that a conversation, that people feel like they have to choose, that is the very thing that I have to continue to fight against. I don’t think there is an either-or. We can be phenomenal at our profession. We also can advocate for our community and a better society, better conditions for our people. 

Advertisement

In the last nine years of NFL exile, did deciding to stand for the anthem in order to get signed ever cross your mind?

No. 

Why not? 

Because I set out with a clear goal and clear objective, and the conditions in our society have not changed. There’s been progress made in some areas, but holistically, when we look at the climate and environment that we are living in today, those conditions largely have not changed. There is never going to be a moment where I take a position of, “Hey, I’ll stand up so I can get my career back.” Because that then becomes a moral concession: If you threaten my career, or if you threaten my money, I will actually say I don’t care about the people, and I will look at this just from an individual perspective. That was a line I was not going to cross.

Advertisement

In the book, you detail conversations you had with a few teams around the league. Which team did you feel closest to signing with?  

There were three teams that I thought were close. The first was the Seattle Seahawks. In 2017, flew up there, met with Pete Carroll, John Schneider, the head coach and GM of the Seahawks. When I got there, basically the conversation was, “We know you’re a starting quarterback.” I didn’t do a

workout while I was there. They’re like, “We know you can play. We’ve game-planned for you the last few years. That’s not a question for us.” The entire conversation while I was there was just around my politics, taking the knee, how I thought about policing, how I thought about the military, what their community would think, what potential players would think. 

In retrospect, it was fascinating to me on a few different fronts. One, the NFL claims it’s a meritocracy. So walking in a building and telling me you know I’m a starter, and not walking out with an offer makes that fall flat on its face. The second part is I just think about it from a labor-laws perspective. Being the owner of a business, a company, I would never be able to ask those questions and get away with it. 

Advertisement

They didn’t sign me that year. Reached back out the following year to have me come in for a workout. Had booked the flight, was ready to go out there, and prior to getting on the flight, they called my agent. Said, “Well, before he comes out to work out, will he commit to not taking a knee?” I said no. I won’t commit to that. Canceled the flight. Canceled the workout. Never heard from them again. [A spokesperson for the Seahawks did not respond to TIME’s request for comment.

The second one was the Ravens, and this one came about because we played against the Ravens in the Super Bowl. Jim Harbaugh was my coach during that time. His brother John Harbaugh was head coach of the Ravens, and I reached out to Jim and wanted to get his perspective. “Is there anyone that you know that would be interested? Do you think your brother would be open to a call?” John was on board and was like, “Yeah, let’s do it.” John went back, advocated for it, wanted to sign me. “It got shut down from above me. I don’t have the power to just outright make that decision. But if it was my choice, you would be here.” [A Ravens representative referred TIME to a 2017 quote from Baltimore general manager Ozzie Newsome—now an executive vice president with the team—who said, “(Ravens owner) Steve Bisciotti has not told us we cannot sign Colin Kaepernick, nor has he blocked the move. Whoever is making those claims is wrong.”]

Then the third one was the Raiders in 2022. Had run into [Raiders owner] Mark Davis at an airport. This was actually the first time I had been face-to-face with one of the owners blackballing me. It was a very interesting conversation because it was almost disconnected from the reality of what was going on. Saw me and was like, “Hey, what’s up? How are you doing? What you been up to?” I was like, “What? What are you talking about? I’ve been trying to play, and you’ve been keeping me out.”  

That led to a follow-up conversation about me trying to play. He came and sat in my living room, and we talked about playing for the Raiders. That led to a workout with the Raiders and Josh McDaniels. Workout went great. Josh McDaniels, after the fact, was like, “He looked bigger, stronger, faster than last time saw you.” Mark Davis came in the room after. “So proud of you. That was great workout.” One of the scouts on the way back said, “I’m surprised they let you walk out of the building without signing you. That’s the best workout we’ve had in years from a quarterback.” Never heard from him again. [The Raiders declined to comment.]

Advertisement

When Jim, who coached Michigan to the 2023 national title, got the job with the Los Angeles Chargers in ‘24, did you reach out to him? Was there any conversation there?

Yeah.

What happened? 

He told me that was a table he was not willing to stand on. It was disappointing because prior to that he had been advocating for me. Said I should be a starter. I can help a team win championships. Had a conversation with him and said, “Look, I don’t even care what the role is. Like I know Justin Herbert’s there. I know the reality of what you have to navigate as a head coach. Let me take the No. 2 spot then. Let me come in, just show you, show everyone else what I can do.” Wouldn’t do it. No opportunity, no workout. 

Advertisement

Has that affected your relationship with him?

Yeah. And I’ll say, also in part because there was a conversation that was put out that he had offered me a coaching job, which just wasn’t true. I don’t know where and why that came out. That’s made the relationship a little bit different since. [When asked to respond to Kaepernick’s comments to TIME about joining the Chargers as a player or coach, Harbaugh, through a Chargers spokesperson, pointed to a 2024 press conference, in which he said he “pulsed” Kaepernick’s interest in coaching.]

Why are you confident that you are ready to be an NFL quarterback right

now?

Advertisement

Because I train for it. I rely on my training and preparation for any moment. I’ve grown confident in my ability to continue to stay ready because I’ve shown that the training works, and I’ve shown that I’ve been able to go out and perform. 

What’s your relationship with the national anthem today? When you go to sporting events, what do you do?

I don’t go out for the Star-Spangled Banner. I’m either seated where I’m at, or I’m not out there at all, and then show up when it’s time for the actual game to come on.

Your daughter is 4. When this time is right, what will you say to her about the national anthem? 

This is actually a funny and timely question. We just went through the process of moving. We’re putting some of the artwork up and pictures up. We have the TIME cover framed. I don’t like having any of my stuff in rooms that I’m in. Feels weird to me. But my wife wants to have stuff up. And my daughter found it, and she grabbed it and was like, “Oh, this is going to my room.” But she was like, “Baba, why are you taking a knee like this?” She’s showing me how I’m taking a knee. Not a conversation I was expecting to be having at 3 ½  years old.

Advertisement

What did you say to her about it? 

“Well, Baba was protesting to try to create a better life for everyone. Thought all people should be able to be successful and have good lives and be treated fairly.” 

What are you going to tell her when she asks about why you stopped playing in the NFL? 

It’s going to be an honest conversation, in part because I also know I have to prepare her for the reality that she’s going to walk into rooms and they’re going to see her last name is Kaepernick. She’s going to get asked questions and she’s going to have to have to navigate things that she never asked for. Part of my responsibility as a father is making sure that she’s prepared and equipped for that.

Advertisement

Going back to your early life a bit – you credit your parents with raising you and having your back. But there were many moments where they weren’t as sensitive to your racial experience and awakenings as you would have liked. You make that very clear in the book and don’t spare your feelings about it. Have your mom and dad read the book?

They have not read it yet.

How do you anticipate they’ll react to it? 

There’s moments that they just don’t know about. It is also something that, for me, in thinking about a white couple born and raised in Wisconsin, adopting a young Black boy, it is very difficult for them to understand the reality of what that’s going to be for me growing up. As far as raising me on strong fundamentals and morals, teaching me to work hard, teaching me to treat people well regardless of what their position or status may be in life, all of those things they did extremely well. But when it comes to understanding being Black, being a Black man, what that means, navigating society, that part largely didn’t exist. That’s where a lot of the conflicts come in around culture, around perception, around who I actually was. I knew they always loved me as their son. I don’t know if they always loved my Blackness. And I think that’s an interesting nuance to be able to navigate.

Advertisement

How would you characterize your relationship with them now?

I think we’re in a good place. My daughter loves calling them during dinner. That is part of her routine now. They come out, they visit. But there is still some of the complexities there.

At several points in the book, you talk about the business of the NFL in the same breath as slavery. Of being photographed in compression shorts at the draft combine, you write, “My mind immediately went to the scenes I had witnessed in numerous movies depicting slave auction blocks.” You also write, “I fully believe what happened to me was a form of buck breaking. That’s a slave term to describe how masters used to whip and sexually abuse enslaved men in front of a crowd to dehumanize them and warn other slaves that they better not step out of line. I was made into a warning to other NFL players and professional athletes: You better not challenge the league’s authority.” Were you ever worried that people might be offended by that?

No. I know people would take things in the context that they want to. But the parallels between the two are undeniable. Bill Rhoden wrote a whole book around it, Forty Million Dollar Slaves. This came up for Curt Flood when he was fighting for free agency for professional players. “Well, you’re making $90,000 a year, Curt Flood. How can you compare this to slavery?” And I believe his quote around that was, “A well-paid slave is a slave nonetheless,” or something to that effect. Which speaks more to the institutions and practices around how you are treating people and the process that they’re going through, and the systems that they have to navigate, as opposed to just taking something in isolation. 

Advertisement

Two news stories weren’t addressed in the book. One is your decision to wear socks depicting police as cartoon pigs in 2016, before you took your public stance. That offended law enforcement personnel, and police unions in particular. Why don’t you, or why do you, regret that specific decision?

When I wore those socks, we were seeing police killing Black people with impunity across the country. This is something that has systemically been in place. It came out of slave patrols, built into modern-day policing. Now, policing in the U.S. exists in a way that we don’t see in other areas throughout the world, so to me, that was sending a message around the inhumane practices that police were practicing. 

It seemed to have an effect where some people would never forgive you after that. But you knew that was a risk?

The same people who are offended, in a way that, “hey, we’re never going to forgive you for that,” why are you so remorseful for police killing Black people? Why are you so accepting of that? A pair of socks is so offensive to you, but the killing of a human life you’re OK with. So, if we’re really going to have a conversation around it, let’s actually put it in contrast to the conversations that we’re having. I’m going to choose valuing human life in every instance.

Advertisement

The other story is the shelving of the ESPN documentary about you, directed by Spike Lee. About a year ago, ESPN said in a statement that “ESPN, Colin Kaepernick and Spike Lee have collectively decided to no longer proceed with this project as a result of certain creative differences.” What were those creative differences?

We had approved for the documentary to go out, and that was not something that fit within their timeline. So the documentary is finished. It’s ready to go. We’re looking for potential partners to be able to place it.

Why didn’t ESPN want it?

It’s a great question. I know they have shifting priorities, as we’re seeing publicly right now. We also know they were, I believe, at that point in time in the midst of negotiating their deal with the NFL. So I can’t say that those things are connected. But I believe they’re all factors. [An ESPN spokesperson sent TIME a statement: “Two years ago, the three parties involved in this project came to a mutual decision, based on creative differences, not to move forward. Creative differences are not uncommon when several entities collaborate on a project of this kind. Because multiple parties were involved, we are limited in what we can share publicly. This is not new as the decision not to move forward was agreed upon Monday, July 29th 2024. We are grateful for the work that went into it.”]

Advertisement

In a recent interview, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seemed to agree with the sentiment that “Woke 1.0 was crazy.” She was referring to the period, after the murder of George Floyd in 2020, where there were calls, for example, to defund the police. You wrote in a 2020 essay “in order to eradicate anti-Blackness, we must also abolish the police. The abolition of one without the other is impossible.” What is your response to AOC’s characterization and other political characterizations that sentiments like you expressed went too far?

I understand the political realities that politicians are navigating. I’m not naive to that. I also think the reality is, if we are trying to create better communities that allow us to thrive, our resources shouldn’t be going towards policing. They should be going towards resources that allow the community to thrive. When you invest in communities, they get safer. People do better. Crime rates drop. I would not discredit the work that was done around the country during 2020, because that has laid the foundation for the movement that we’re seeing now. We’re seeing a different wave of politicians show up: “Am I providing direct benefit to the people that I’m serving?” I think that is the most important priority to be able to keep in mind. 

Do you still support abolishing policing?

Yes. I think that’s the work that we should be doing. Reallocating those resources to directly benefit communities and give them the resources that they need to be able to thrive.

Advertisement

You write in the book about how, in 2016, you met with your San Francisco 49ers teammates to explain in more detail why you were protesting during the anthem. You write: “I told my teammates how law enforcement in this country has always been an enemy of Black people.” In 2026, do you still feel that law enforcement in this country is an enemy of Black people?

The institution has not changed. It still exists in the same form it did in 2016. We’re still seeing the same issues come out of it. We’re still seeing that fuel and funnel into the prison industrial complex. So until those systems are dismantled and those resources are allocated to benefit communities, the institutions are serving the purpose that they were laid out to do. 

A Nike Ad featuring American football quarterback Colin Kaepernick is on display September 8, 2018 in New York City. —Angela Weiss—AFP/Getty Images

How would you characterize how Donald Trump has treated you? 

At least to my knowledge, that was the first time I had seen a President use their position and political power to target an individual citizen. And I think that laid the foundation and set the stage for a lot of what we are seeing now. And in many ways, I feel like that was an initial test to see how far things could go. I obviously do not agree with his political views or approach. I do not believe that the work he is doing is actually to benefit people other than himself.

The NFL has reported giving more than $450 million to grassroots organizations to benefit communities in need. Do you see that as a sincere response to your protest or a PR play?

Advertisement

I view that as a PR play. There was a player-owners meeting. Bob McNair, who was the owner of the Texans at the time, said, “You need to tell your compadres to stop that other business,” meaning the protests. Bob Kraft was in that meeting and said, “We need to talk about the elephant in the room and ending the protests.” And Terry Pegula, the owner of the Bills, just said explicitly, “We need a Black face to be at the forefront of this to help us stop this.” If it was actually to try to create change and benefit Black communities, the NFL’s response holistically from the start would have looked drastically different. I would have a job. Eric Reid would have a job. The other players that were targeted throughout that process wouldn’t have had to navigate that.

A protester wearing a Colin Kaepernick SF49ers jersey joins others in taking a knee, led by Former NFL wide receiver Terrell Owens in support of former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick on June 11, 2020 in Inglewood, California. —Frederic J. Brown—AFP/Getty Images

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell admitted, in 2020, that the league was wrong for not listening more closely to the message and meaning behind protests like yours. He encouraged a team to sign you. Do you forgive him?

No, because he’s still taking those actions to this day. That they have not changed their practices. The NFL just went through navigating race-norming, where they were assessing that the baseline intelligence or cognitive abilities of Black players was lower than white players, so that they could deny them medical benefits after playing in the NFL. It’s important to put it into broader context. This isn’t a practice that just exists in relation to me and the protest. [The NFL declined to comment.

The book details your relationship with Jay-Z, whose company, Roc Nation, partnered with the NFL in 2019 to consult on Super Bowl halftime entertainment and other performances and initiatives. Jay-Z recently brought you up in a rap lyric at Yankee Stadium, saying, Buddy took a check, I ain’t even mad at him, but along with that check you gotta sign a non-disparagement. I’m the one they can’t control.” How would you characterize how Jay-Z has communicated with you, and used you or brought you up?

The fact that seven years after him cutting a deal to undermine the protest, unprompted, [he] brings me up, sounds like a guilty conscience to me. I would also say, just to make very clear, the distinction here. One, I did not sign a non-disparagement. But the second part of this is these are very different situations. He’s trying to create a false equivalency around being blackballed by the NFL and having to go through the grievance process, the legal process that’s already laid out by the collective bargaining agreement between the NFL and the players’ union–going through that process, and then reaching a settlement at the end of it, because that is your path towards reconciliation, is very different than cutting a deal with the NFL to create personal benefit and undermine the protests. Trying to conflate the two is very disingenuous. [A representative for Roc Nation and Jay-Z did not respond to TIME’s request for comment.]

Advertisement

Are you surprised that DEI is under fire? 

I’m not surprised it’s being attacked by this Administration. What I am surprised by is the capitulation by corporations, by organizations to go along with it. What I’ve seen is when you show weakness, that you’ll bow down to them, that you’ll capitulate to them, they’re going to try to take that further and further. 

Did you make any mistakes over the past 10 years? 

One that I think about a good amount is, I had intentionally taken an approach of I’m going to do my best to not call out or attack people who I disagree with. I did not want to create an environment or narrative that was centered around Black people fighting and distracting from the intention of the protest. Even with Jay-Z, I didn’t go out and do interviews around that. I believe people will see the work, and my hope is in seeing the work, people will look at and say, “Oh, that’s how it should be done.” But I don’t know if that created additional space for people to take the narrative in places that shouldn’t have gone. It’s one of those things that I’m very mindful of as I move forward. 

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025