SEC files final response in Ripple XRP case

As a researcher following this legal battle between Ripple Labs and the SEC closely, I believe that the SEC’s latest move in filing its final reply in the remedies phase is a significant step forward in the case. The SEC’s arguments challenge Ripple’s assertions of no recklessness and fair notice, emphasizing the potential for future violations.

Ripple Labs and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have made significant strides in their ongoing legal dispute. The SEC has advanced its position by submitting its final response in the litigation’s remedies stage.

As a crypto investor, I’ve been closely following the ongoing legal battle between Ripple and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In their latest submission to the remedies brief, the SEC has disputed Ripple’s claims that they acted without negligence and that there shouldn’t be confusion about XRP‘s regulatory status. The court had previously dismissed Ripple’s “fair notice” defense, which is a key argument in their case. Essentially, the SEC is arguing that Ripple should have been aware of the potential legal risks associated with XRP and taken appropriate actions to comply with securities regulations.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) continues to hold the position that Ripple may repeat questionable behavior, despite the fact that Ripple has adhered to regulations since the XRP lawsuit commenced in 2020.

Based on the information provided in the brief, Ripple has attempted to minimize its responsibility during the 2013 XRP Initial Coin Offering (ICO), while emphasizing its collaborative efforts with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) since then.

Despite the U.S. SEC’s statement that Ripple may have avoided violations since 2020, the potential for future infringements cannot be ruled out according to the law.

The SEC maintains that Ripple’s promises to alter its conduct following the lawsuit do not excuse the need for injunctions. In the SEC’s view, Ripple’s assertions of adhering to legal advice and planning to modify future XRP sales according to the lawsuit’s decree are deceiving. The SEC asserts that Ripple misconstrues the order’s meaning and refuses to acknowledge its consequences for conformity.

Ripple’s contentions regarding selling cryptocurrency outside the United States and only to accredited investors have been contradicted by the remedies provided in response to the summary judgment. These defenses were no longer part of the argument during this stage of the legal process.

An alternate expression for the given text could be: Ripple’s assertions about modifying contracts for on-demand liquidity (ODL) transactions are disregarded since these contracts were devoid of specific limitations that were considered violations to begin with.

In essence, the SEC contends that Ripple’s arguments do not eliminate the requirement for injunctions to halt any potential future infringements.

In response to the SEC’s rebuttal in the remedies argument, Ripple’s top lawyer, Stuart Alderoty, remarked that the SEC’s esteem keeps on waning.

International financial regulators with strong crypto licensing systems may be taken aback to learn that the SEC compares their actions to merely handing out fishing permits.

Alderoty voiced concerns over the SEC’s inconsistent application of the law in the XRP case. He remained hopeful for a resolution and a final verdict, which is predicted to occur around September by industry experts. The crypto community stays tuned for updates on this anticipated legal decision.

As a researcher studying the latest developments in the blockchain industry, I’m excited to share that Ripple is expanding its reach into the Japanese market by collaborating with HashKey DX, a renowned Tokyo-based consulting firm. Together, they will be introducing XRPL enterprise solutions to businesses and organizations in Japan.

2024-05-08 10:49

Read More