SEC vs Ripple

Depricated as of Oct 2022

Some CRYPKYP functionalities are depricated as of October 2022 and will no longer be populated until further development and future version.
Although all here is visible and interactable you can not Contribute to those articles.
Try looking at other information on the Platform and Contributing there!

Have a great day,

After filing a “summary judgment,” the Ripple v. SEC lawsuit will reach a conclusion

SEC vs Ripple
SEC vs Ripple / Image Credit: CRYPKYP
1663581718 19 Sep / 10:01

Ripple Labs and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have requested that a federal court determine whether Ripple's XRP sales violated U.S. securities laws. In separate papers filed on September 17, Ripple and the SEC asked the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for a summary judgment.

Summary judgments are filed to the courts when a party feels there is sufficient evidence to decide without the necessity for a trial.

Both parties have requested that Judge Analisa Torres immediately determine whether Ripple's sales of XRP violate U.S. securities laws. Ripple has maintained that the SEC has exhausted its arguments to establish that XRP sales constitute an "investment contract." "Whereas the SEC has remained steadfast in its convictions.

In a September 17 tweet, the CEO of Ripple, Brad Garlinghouse, stated that the SEC “is not interested in implementing the law.”

He stated, “They want to recreate everything in an impermissible endeavor to expand their jurisdiction well beyond the power allocated to them by Congress.”

In the meanwhile, Ripple’s general counsel Stuart Alderoty stated that “after two years of litigation,” the SEC is “unable to find any investment contract” and “cannot satisfy a single prong of the Supreme Court’s Howey test.”

Ripple said in its motion for summary judgment that the SEC’s position “reduces to an impermissibly broad assertion of jurisdiction over any transfer of an asset.”

As there were no contractual duties between Ripple and XRP token holders, the petition further stated that the SEC could not demonstrate that XRP token holders could not “reasonably expect gains” from Ripple’s efforts.

In contrast, the SEC’s motion for summary judgment stated that an “investment contract” might exist without a contract, rights transferred to the purchaser, or duties owed to the issuer.

In contrast, Ripple claimed in its motion that “this is not and should not be the law because, without these key characteristics, the Howey test cannot be applied properly to anything.”

According to Ripple’s motion, the SEC “acquiesced” to gains resulting from “market forces of supply and demand,” which Ripple cited as a source of income.

U.S. Attorney Jeremy Hogan underlined the significance of this admission in a September 17 tweet, noting that “these admissions are ideal for a summary judgment.”

The filing filings by Ripple and the SEC generally elicited favorable reactions from the XRP community, with one Twitter user proclaiming that “the end is close.”

Nearly two years have passed since the SEC sued Ripple, former CEO Christian Larsen, and current CEO Brad Garlinghouse in December 2020 for allegedly generating $1.3 billion through unregistered sales of XRP-based securities.

If the court implements the summary judgment, the verdict will significantly influence the determination of whether cryptocurrencies are securities under U.S. securities regulations.

Following the motion filing, the XRP token’s price climbed to levels not seen since July, hitting over $0.40, according to CoinGecko. Since then, however, the token’s value has decreased significantly, presently valued at $0.34.

Last News and Media
CRYPKYP contain links to third-party websites, resources, and advertisers. CRYPKYP does not control, sponsor, recommend or otherwise accept responsibility for any third-party content because we are not responsible for the availability of these outside resources or their contents or privacy practices. It will help if you direct any concerns regarding any third-party content to such a third party. We don't accept responsibility for the content of external websites linked to through the Site or the Services. Third-party content is accessed at the user's own risk. CRYPKYP distributes content from third-party publishers as indicated on the site from time to time mainly in Airdrops, News / Media, Whale Alerts, and Rumors. In these circumstances, CRYPKYP only provides limited stylistic input to the content. CRYPKYP does not verify and takes no responsibility for the accuracy of the content provided by any such third-party publishers.