The United States Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) defeat in the Ripple case, where US District Judge Analisa Torres ruled in favor of the firm’s XRP sales, has sparked intense debate.
As the dust settles, a pressing question emerges: does the SEC’s appeal against the XRP ruling genuinely have a chance of success?
The SEC’s Warning Against Ripple’s Ruling
The SEC’s dissatisfaction was evident when it suggested that Judge Torres’s ruling against them was erroneous. Torres’s decision stood in Ripple’s favor, indicating that a substantial portion of its XRP sales did not transgress investor-protection statutes.
“It may certainly be the case that many programmatic buyers purchased XRP with an expectation of profit, but they did not derive that expectation from Ripple’s efforts. None of the programmatic buyers were aware that they were buying XRP from Ripple,” Torres said.
This ruling has stirred the waters. Other defendants, such as Do Kwon of Terraform Labs, are trying to utilize the judgment to counter his SEC charges.
The core of the SEC’s discontent seems to stem from what it interprets as “baseless requirements” introduced by Judge Torres to the test of classifying an asset as a security.
Torres’s perspective suggests Ripple’s sales to institutional investors mandated SEC oversight. In contrast, its sales to individual investors via crypto exchanges did not.
The SEC responded that reconciling this reasoning with foundational securities laws is an uphill task.
Go to Source to See Full Article
Author: Bary Rahma