No 'Clarity Act' Passed the Senate — the AI Bill Is Stalled

Last verified: 2026-08-02 UTC. No bill named “Clarity Act” has passed the full U.S. Senate. The Clarity Act showing up in many 2026 Senate-status searches is H.R. 3633, the Digital Asset Market CLARITY Act, a digital-asset market-structure bill. The AI-facing bill is S. 3108, the AI-Related Job Impacts Clarity Act, and its public record does not show a confirmed committee markup or Senate floor passage since introduction. Neither bill creates a present compliance duty as of this verification date. [1][2]

This is a status record, not legal advice. Its purpose is to keep bill identity, chamber status, subject matter, and proposed obligations separate before anyone turns a headline or search snippet into a compliance instruction.

Status at a glance: two bills, one shared name, no Senate passage

For risk teams, the answer should not be shortened to “the Clarity Act is moving” or “the AI Clarity Act passed committee.” Those phrases collapse two different legislative vehicles into one false obligation set. If someone is checking whether a federal AI rule now requires employer reports, the answer is no. If someone is checking whether crypto market-structure legislation cleared a Senate committee, the answer is yes — but that is still not enactment.

The same distinction applies in other pending-versus-enacted records: a House-passed bill awaiting Senate floor time is still pending, as in this site’s permanent DST Senate vote status tracker. The label on the bill is less important than the chamber action that has actually occurred.

The Senate-moving “Clarity Act” is the crypto bill

H.R. 3633 is the Digital Asset Market CLARITY Act. Its path is real, documented, and easy to overread. The House passed it 294-134 on July 17, 2025. Senate Banking later approved it 15-9 on May 14, 2026. It was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar as Calendar No. 423 on June 1, 2026. Those are meaningful steps, but none is the same thing as a vote by the full Senate. [1][3]

The July 2026 text is another common source of overstatement. Senator Cynthia Lummis released updated CLARITY Act text on July 22, 2026, and the update was described as a 616-page merged version with a government-ethics title negotiated with the White House. That may matter to crypto counsel tracking the bill’s shape, but release of revised text is not Senate passage. [4]

The floor-status point is also not subtle. On July 23, Majority Leader John Thune said the bill would not reach the floor before recess, and reporting after that point treated the measure as put off while the Senate used limited floor time elsewhere. As of this article’s verification date, that leaves H.R. 3633 pending before the full Senate, not enacted. [5]

If enacted, the obligations worth tracking would sit in digital-asset regulation. The CRS overview describes the bill as a market-structure measure addressing how digital assets would be regulated, including roles for the SEC and CFTC and registration concepts for digital-commodity exchanges. That is a crypto compliance file, not an AI governance file. [6]

A crypto-policy page can be useful on the H.R. 3633 question if it is anchored to the bill number, committee vote, calendar placement, and text. It becomes unsafe when it rides the phrase “AI regulation” without explaining that the underlying Senate-moving bill is not the AI-related Clarity Act.

The AI-related “Clarity Act” is S. 3108, and it has not moved the same way

S. 3108 is the AI-Related Job Impacts Clarity Act. It was introduced on November 5, 2025 by Sens. Hawley and Warner as a bill to surface job losses and other workforce effects attributed to artificial intelligence. The bill number matters because this is the only “Clarity Act” in the materials reviewed here that is actually about AI. [7]

Its proposed obligation is not a general AI safety program, model-registration rule, or product-liability regime. The reported framework would require covered entities to submit quarterly reports to the Department of Labor within 30 days after quarter-end on AI-attributed layoffs, AI-related hires, unfilled positions, and retraining, with NAICS codes attached. The data would be published through BLS, and reports would go to Congress within 60 days. Initial coverage would include publicly traded companies and federal agencies, with a 180-day rulemaking process to extend coverage to certain non-publicly traded companies. [8]

That would be a material employer-reporting obligation if it became law. It has not. The safer status formulation is “no committee markup confirmed,” not “passed,” not “enacted,” and not even a clean prediction about failure. The public bill record does not establish Senate passage, and the available status evidence does not support treating the proposed quarterly DOL reporting regime as active law. [2]

There are also practical objections to the proposal, but those objections explain the kind of scrutiny the bill may draw; they do not decide its legislative fate. The Center for Data Innovation argued that attributing a layoff to AI could be unworkable, that the bill could duplicate existing JOLTS and WARN-related data, and that public reporting could stigmatize firms using AI even where business decisions have multiple causes. [9]

Those critiques are relevant for counsel asked what the bill would require, because the hardest part of the proposed regime would likely be attribution: who inside the employer decides that a job loss was “AI-related,” what evidence supports that classification, and how the company handles mixed causes. But that is still a proposed-law problem. It is not a live federal filing obligation in Q3 2026.

How to answer the Senate-passage question without importing the wrong obligation

The minimum safe answer is: no “Clarity Act” has passed the full Senate as of August 2, 2026. H.R. 3633 has moved through House passage, Senate Banking approval, calendar placement, and updated Senate text, but it is crypto market-structure legislation and still lacks a full Senate vote. S. 3108 is the AI-related bill, but it has no confirmed committee markup and no Senate passage.

For a partner memo, keep the obligation columns separate. Digital-asset firms may be watching H.R. 3633 because of the SEC/CFTC allocation and exchange-registration structure. Large employers and federal agencies would watch S. 3108 only for a possible future DOL reporting regime tied to AI-attributed workforce changes. Neither record supports telling a client that a new federal AI “Clarity Act” compliance duty is already in effect.

Prediction-market odds, statements about negotiations, and market reactions to draft crypto text can be useful color after the status is correct. They are not substitutes for the sequence that matters: introduction, committee action, calendar placement, floor vote, passage by both chambers, presentment, signature or veto override, and effective date. A 15-9 committee vote is a committee vote. Calendar No. 423 is a calendar placement. Neither is enactment.

If the assignment is to identify live AI obligations in 2026, the answer should move away from the Clarity Act label and toward enacted regimes. For example, this site tracks actual 2026 AI compliance triggers separately in its federal and international AI obligations coverage. The Clarity Act result belongs in the pending-bill file.

References

1. H.R.3633 - Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 — Congress.gov
2. S.3108 - AI-Related Job Impacts Clarity Act — Congress.gov
3. Crypto industry scores win as Clarity Act bill clears Senate hurdle — CNBC, May 14, 2026
4. Lummis Releases Updated CLARITY Act Text — Office of U.S. Senator Cynthia Lummis, July 22, 2026
5. U.S. Senate Puts Off Crypto Clarity Act for Now as It Focuses Limited Bandwidth Elsewhere — CoinDesk, July 27, 2026
6. Digital Asset Market Structure Bills in the 119th Congress — Congressional Research Service
7. Hawley, Warner to Introduce Bipartisan Legislation Revealing Number of Jobs Lost to AI — Office of U.S. Senator Josh Hawley, November 5, 2025
8. AI-Related Job Impacts Clarity Act — Workplace Privacy, Data Management & Security Report, Jackson Lewis
9. The AI-Related Job Impacts Clarity Act Will Only Create Confusion — Center for Data Innovation