Recently, the legal case between Ripple and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has shifted its focus, as some legal scholars think that the SEC may change its mind about appealing the recent court ruling. Digital assets lawyer Bill Morgan recently suggested that the SEC may decide to decline an appeal if its decision-making basis would be purely legal.
Morgan’s comments come after a series of rulings that have favored Judge Analisa Torres’ reasoning in the Ripple case. Notably, Judge Orrick in the Kraken case and Judge Jackson in the Binance case have aligned with Judge Torres’ approach, particularly in differentiating between primary and secondary market transactions. Therefore, this consistency of the judges has boosted confidence in Torres’ ruling, which stated that XRP was not a security when sold to retail investors as opposed to when it was considered a security when sold to institutional investors.
Source: Bill Morgan
Also Read: Ripple and Bank of America Relationship Sparks Speculation
Increasing Subscription to Judge Torres’ Logic
It discusses the recent judicial endorsements of the Torres verdict through the text of the reaction to Morgan on social media. As for him, the perspectives of Judges Orrick and Jackson on some of the provisions of the Ripple ruling dismiss the claims that Torres’ logic is flawed and detrimental to Ripple as a company. This concurrence of the opinion of more than one judge may be the push for the SEC toward the consideration of an appeal.
Advertisement
On the other hand, Judge Rakoff’s decision-making in the Terraform Labs case has raised many questions within the digital asset fraternity. Unlike other authors, Rakoff did not differentiate between the primary and the secondary market transactions, which evoked criticism and doubt in his thought process. This has further brought into focus the importance of the backing that was given to the decision by Judge Torres when handling the Ripple case.
The community has reacted strongly to Morgan’s words, with many assuming that the SEC’s original action against Ripple in 2020 was intended to limit the company’s growth. Critics have accused the SEC of prioritizing non-legal concerns over adherence to the law, primarily if the commission pursues an appeal despite the Ripple case’s lack of evident legal flaws.
Conclusion
As the legal battle between Ripple and the SEC unfolds, the growing judicial support for Judge Torres’ ruling may play a pivotal role in the SEC’s next steps. If the agency chooses not to appeal, it could indicate that legal reasoning, rather than external influences, is guiding the decision-making process. However, if an appeal is filed, it may suggest that factors beyond the courtroom are at play in this high-stakes case.
Also Read: Ripple and Kraken Achieve Legal Milestone as Court Rejects SEC’s Crypto Asset Security Theory
Maxwell Mutuma
Maxwell is a crypto-economic analyst and Blockchain enthusiast, passionate about helping people understand the potential of decentralized technology. He writes extensively on topics such as blockchain, cryptocurrency, tokens, and more for top publications such as Coingape, Coin Edition, and The Coin Republic. His goal is to spread knowledge about this revolutionary technology and its implications for economic freedom and social good.