Recently, U.S. lawmakers represented by Representative Michael Cloud and Majority Whip Tom Emmer have been actively pushing legislation to permanently ban the Federal Reserve from issuing Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs).

Their core argument is that: CBDC is essentially an "Orwellian" government surveillance tool that would grant unelected Federal Reserve officials unprecedented financial control, infringing on citizens' financial privacy and freedom, and fundamentally contradicting the American spirit. Therefore, they believe that any temporary ban with a set deadline (such as prohibiting until 2031) is far from sufficient, and a "permanent" legal blockade is necessary.

The related legislative proposals mainly focus on several key bills:

- The *Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act* (HR 1919): Introduced by Emmer, aims to prohibit the Federal Reserve from directly or indirectly issuing CBDCs to individuals, preventing it from becoming a retail bank with access to citizens' financial data. This bill was passed in the House of Representatives in July 2025 with a vote of 219-210 but is currently awaiting Senate review.
- The *No CBDC Act* (S 464): Introduced by Senator Mike Lee, also aims to prohibit the Federal Reserve or the Treasury Department from issuing CBDCs, but has faced obstacles in Congress.
- Additional budget/housing legislation: Lawmakers are attempting to embed permanent bans on CBDC into legislation such as the *21st Century Housing Act* or the National Defense Authorization Act, which are must-pass bills, to bypass legislative gridlock.

Behind this movement are deep concerns about government power expansion, as well as shared lobbying interests between traditional banking (worried about disintermediation) and the crypto industry (hoping to exclude official competitors for private stablecoins). After the Trump administration took office, it also issued an executive order suspending federal CBDC research, aligning with legislative efforts by Congressional Republicans. Currently, although the House has expressed a clear stance, whether this permanent ban will pass the Senate and become law remains uncertain.