Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Trump pays DHS workers, but legal experts cry foul

Published

on

‘Tariffs’ chatter surges after Trump’s announcement on global exports

President Trump’s DHS pay order has directed all Department of Homeland Security employees to be paid using redirected federal funds, but legal and budget experts say the administration may be violating a 150-year-old law that gives Congress sole control over federal spending.

Summary

  • Trump signed two executive directives — one on March 27 for TSA workers and an expanded memo on April 4 for all DHS employees — directing pay using funds from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, sidestepping the ongoing partial shutdown
  • Legal experts warn the move may conflict with the Antideficiency Act, which bars the executive branch from spending money that Congress has not appropriated for a specific purpose
  • The administration has provided no detailed public justification for how it is legally connecting TSA operations to the bill’s DHS border enforcement funds, drawing criticism from budget analysts on both sides

President Trump’s DHS pay order, which directs the Department of Homeland Security to pay all its employees using funds redirected from last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, has put paychecks back in workers’ accounts but opened a serious constitutional question that legal experts say the administration has yet to answer. Trump initially signed a directive on March 27 covering TSA workers, then expanded it on April 4 to include all DHS employees, citing “an emergency situation compromising the Nation’s security.”

The Antideficiency Act, a 150-year-old federal statute, bars the executive branch from spending money that has not been expressly appropriated by Congress for the specific purpose being funded. Trump’s order directed the DHS secretary to use funds with “a reasonable and logical nexus to TSA operations” from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — a law that allocated $10 billion to DHS for border-related functions, with no specific mention of TSA.

Advertisement

Budget analysts flagged the ambiguity immediately. “The administration’s provided no real clarity about what they’re doing publicly that would allow someone to even figure out whether what they’re doing is legal or not legal,” Devin O’Connor, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, told CNBC. “They haven’t made the case for it in any kind of public way.”

Where the Money Is Coming From — and Why That Matters

Administration officials confirmed the payments are being drawn from the One Big Beautiful Bill’s DHS fund, which gave the secretary discretion to deploy resources supporting DHS’s border mission. Bobby Kogan of the Center for American Progress estimated the cost of funding TSA runs approximately $140 million per week, suggesting the administration could sustain payments for nearly a year before that pool runs dry. But critics note that the bill’s language does not cover TSA, which handles airport security rather than border enforcement, making the legal nexus tenuous.

Senate Majority Leader Thune acknowledged the order as a “short-term solution” that “takes the immediate pressure off,” while noting it does nothing to resolve the underlying standoff between the two chambers.

Advertisement

The Constitutional Fault Line

As crypto.news reported, government shutdowns carry consequences beyond the immediate departments affected — including delays to economic data releases, stalled regulatory activity, and heightened uncertainty across financial markets. The constitutional issue here runs deeper than a funding dispute. Article I of the US Constitution vests the power of the purse exclusively in Congress. Trump’s move to unilaterally pay workers without an active appropriation mirrors actions that have historically invited legal challenge under the Antideficiency Act.

A second broader executive memo on April 4 extended the same approach to every DHS employee, not just TSA, including furloughed workers and those in agencies not obviously connected to the One Big Beautiful Bill’s border funding mandate. As crypto.news noted in its coverage of the DHS shutdown’s earlier market impact, prolonged fiscal uncertainty of this kind tends to weigh on investor sentiment and delay forward guidance from the Federal Reserve.

“America’s air travel system has reached its breaking point,” Trump said in his original March 27 memo. What remains unresolved is whether his chosen remedy is within his legal authority to execute.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Did Japan’s PM Actually Back the Memecoin Bearing Her Name?

Published

on

Japan’s SANAE TOKEN saga has entered a new phase, with fresh media reports alleging the prime minister’s office knew more than it admitted. But for crypto markets, the bigger story is what happens next in Tokyo’s legislature.

The political noise and the regulatory signal are arriving at exactly the same time.

How the Token Unraveled

SANAE TOKEN launched on Solana on Feb. 25, as BeInCrypto reported. NoBorder DAO — a community led by serial entrepreneur Yuji Mizoguchi — issued it as part of a “Japan is Back” initiative, with Takaichi’s name and likeness on the project website. The token surged over 40x on launch day before Takaichi’s March 2 denial triggered a 58% crash.

The FSA opened a probe into NoBorder DAO for operating without a crypto exchange license. The token’s operators halted issuance shortly after.

Advertisement
The SANAE TOKEN website describes the token as “not just a meme, but the hope of Japan,” alongside a portrait of Prime Minister Takaichi and a timeline of her political career. Source: japanisbacksanaet.jp

Japanese Tabloid Reports Secretary’s Approval

Weekly Bunshun, a Japanese tabloid known for breaking political and celebrity scandals, says developer Ken Matsui told the magazine his team informed Takaichi’s office that the project was a crypto asset. That directly contradicts her March 2 denial. Takaichi said neither she nor her office had been told anything about the token.

The publication says it obtained audio recordings of Takaichi’s chief secretary over a period of more than 20 years, reportedly describing the project favorably. Another Japanese online media reported that Takaichi’s office had not responded to media inquiries on the matter as of Tuesday. Takaichi has held no press conference since February 18, when her second cabinet was inaugurated.

The political dimension remains unresolved. What matters for crypto is whether the scandal accelerates — or complicates — Japan’s regulatory overhaul.

FSA Bill Changes the Rules

Japan’s Financial Services Agency submitted its landmark crypto reform bill to parliament this week, Asahi Shimbun reported. The legislation moves crypto from the Payment Services Act into the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, reclassifying digital assets as financial instruments for the first time.

As BeInCrypto previously reported, the maximum prison term for unlicensed crypto sales would triple to 10 years, with fines rising from ¥3 million to ¥10 million. The SESC gains criminal investigation powers it has never held over crypto operators. The SANAE TOKEN case was explicitly cited in Nikkei’s reporting on the legislative push.

Advertisement

The bill would also void transactions with unregistered operators by default, making it easier for investors to seek refunds — a provision directly relevant to the SANAE TOKEN case.

The post Did Japan’s PM Actually Back the Memecoin Bearing Her Name? appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Every 5 Minutes: Korea’s New Rule for Crypto Exchanges

Published

on

South Korea’s financial regulator has ordered all crypto exchanges to verify user asset balances every five minutes, following a massive overpayment incident that shook market confidence earlier this year.

One botched reward payout exposed systemic cracks across the entire industry.

What Triggered the Rules

In February, Bithumb accidentally sent 2,000 BTC per person instead of 2,000 Korean won ($1.40) during a promotional event. The error amounted to roughly $42 billion in misallocated crypto. The Financial Services Commission (FSC) launched emergency inspections across all five major Korean exchanges immediately after. What they found went far beyond a single human mistake.

Most exchanges were only reconciling their books once every 24 hours. Three had no automatic kill switch to halt trading when discrepancies appeared. Four lacked multi-step approval systems for high-risk manual transactions. Two exchanges hadn’t even separated their general accounts from high-risk transaction accounts — a basic safeguard.

Advertisement

What Exchanges Must Now Do

The FSC announced a three-pillar reform package on April 6. Exchanges must run automated balance checks every five minutes, with alerts and automatic trading halts triggered by major mismatches. Monthly external audits replace the previous quarterly schedule, and public disclosures must now include asset-by-asset blockchain holdings rather than a simple coverage ratio.

For manual, high-risk transactions such as event payouts, exchanges must use separate accounts, deploy validity-check systems that automatically reject mismatched inputs, and require cross-verification by a third party before execution.

The FSC will also require exchanges to appoint dedicated risk management officers and establish risk management committees — standards already expected of traditional financial firms. Compliance checks move from annual to twice-yearly, with results reported to regulators.

DAXA, the industry body, will complete self-regulatory amendments this month, with systems built out by May. Key provisions will feed into Korea’s forthcoming second-phase Digital Asset Act.

Advertisement

The post Every 5 Minutes: Korea’s New Rule for Crypto Exchanges appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Chaos Labs Leaves Aave Due to Budget, Risk Disagreements

Published

on

Chaos Labs Leaves Aave Due to Budget, Risk Disagreements

Chaos Labs has parted ways with the Aave ecosystem after serving as the crypto lending protocol’s main risk service provider for three years, citing a budget dispute and disagreements over how Aave should manage risk.

“This decision was not made in haste,” Chaos Labs founder Omer Goldberg said in a post to X on Monday. “We worked in good faith with DAO contributors. Aave Labs was professional and supported increasing our budget to $5m to retain us. However, we are leaving because the engagement no longer reflects how we believe risk should be managed.”

Source: Omer Goldberg

Aave Labs CEO Stani Kulechov said that Chaos didn’t depart on bad terms, but claimed that Chaos pitched a proposal seeking to become the sole risk provider and thus force out other partners — a compromise Aave wasn’t willing to accept.

Chaos played a key role in Aave’s back-end infrastructure, from pricing loans and managing risk in the Aave V2 and V3 markets since November 2022, during which Aave’s total value locked rose fivefold to $26 billion.

Risk has been a major talking point in the Aave community after a user lost $50 million in a trade while interacting with Aave’s interface on March 12. The following week, Aave said it would introduce an “Aave Shield” protection feature to deter users from high-risk trades.

Advertisement

As for Chaos’ departure, Goldberg said there became an increasing misalignment over how the parties thought risk should be managed. He noted that some Aave contributors had left, raising its workload, while also arguing that Aave V4’s expanded functionality introduced additional operational and legal risks that fell on Chaos’ shoulders.

“While Aave Labs is optimistic about a swift migration to V4, history suggests these transitions take months and even years,” Goldberg said. “Until V4 fully absorbs V3’s markets and liquidity, both systems need to be operated and managed simultaneously. The workload during the transition doesn’t halve. It doubles.”

Weighing the risk of a protocol failure, Goldberg said, “There is no regulatory framework, no safe harbor, and no settled law that answers the question of what a risk manager or curator owes when a protocol fails. If things work, the work is invisible. If things break, the blame is not.”

As such, “We are walking away from a $5 million engagement,” Goldberg said.

Advertisement

Chaos wanted Aave to boot LlamaRisk, Chainlink: Kulechov

Aave Labs CEO Stani Kulechov told a slightly different story, stating that Chaos wanted to be the sole risk manager and use its price oracles instead of Chainlink’s.

Following that request would have forced Aave to push out its other risk protocol partner, LlamaRisk, and thus abandon its two-layer economic risk model.

Related: DeFi lender Aave launches on OKX’s Ethereum L2, X Layer

Kulechov added Aave was unwilling to integrate Chaos-built price oracles, citing Aave’s “track record” with Chainlink’s services, which its “users are currently more comfortable with at scale.”

Advertisement

He also said Chaos was already “exploring winding down its risk consultancy services,” and that Aave had offered to double its payment to $5 million to retain them.

Cointelegraph reached out to Chaos Labs for comment.

Kulechov noted that Chaos’ departure hasn’t disrupted the Aave protocol, its smart contracts, token listings or network integrations.

Moving forward, Aave said it “will work closely with LlamaRisk to ensure a smooth transition” and maintain its two-layer economic risk model. 

Advertisement
Source: LlamaRisk

Chaos’ departure comes amid a protocol-wide feud over how much funding and revenue control Aave Labs should receive versus Aave’s decentralized autonomous organization.

Despite the internal issues, Aave crossed the $1 trillion mark in cumulative lending volume in late February, marking a first in the DeFi industry.

Magazine: Animoca teams up with Ava Labs, Shrapnel on Steam: Web3 Gamer