"Since the era of agencies being able to interpret law is gone the 1939 laws do not matter because now the laws practically have to state "cryptocurrency" or "blockchain" in some way shape or form or it doesn't count!"

No, that's a misinterpretation, I'm afraid. They don't have to state that at all.

The change with the end of Chevron is that the agencies no longer get to make interpretaions of the law. The right way to read this is: The change with the end of Chevron is that the AGENCIES no longer get to make interpretaions of the law, not The change with the end of Chevron is that the agencies no longer get to make INTERPRETATIOS of the law.

That is to say: of course laws have to be interpreted; they always have to, no law could possibly be completely clear and expect all of its possible applications. the act of interpretation is unavoidable. What changes with Chevron is that this right/power no longer rests with the agencies, as it had; it means the agency now has to go to xcourt to get an interpretation. Still huge, as a change, because it prevents agencies from just claiming what suits them. But of course the court can still interpret securities law to apply to "crypto". It's just a mucyh, MUCH more complicated process, and there is the change to challenge it when it happens, more than before.