Breaking: Ripple Files Opposition to SEC Appeal Request Over XRP Victory

Ripple, in a significant move, has stood against the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) inclination to initiate an interlocutory appeal. Previously, the SEC showed intentions of challenging the decision made by Judge Analisa Torres about XRP security status.

This decision underscored that XRP does not classify as a security when it’s available on trading platforms. In light of this, Ripple has taken a proactive step by putting forth its appeal against the SEC’s upcoming move.

In a letter, Ripple emphasized its reasons to oppose the SEC’s potential appeal:

• Legal Issues: Ripple pointed out that the court’s verdict stands firm without any prevailing legal discrepancies. Moreover, the SEC has failed to offer any concrete rationale to counter the decision, creating a rift between the two.
• Conclusion of the Case: The company stated that even if the SEC pushes forward with its immediate appeal, it wouldn’t signify the end of this prolonged case.

According to Attorney James K. Filan, who shared this new development with the XRP community, Ripple filed this opposition in conjunction with CEO Brad Garlinghouse and co-founder Chris Larsen.

Us Supreme Court’s Possible Involvement

Brooke Masters, an esteemed journalist from the Financial Times, has penned a piece discussing the ripple effects of the SEC’s regulatory foray into cryptocurrencies. Through her writings, Masters accentuates the significance of the SEC’s proposed challenge against the Torres verdict.

She projects that this could act as a catalyst, enabling the conservative-majority Supreme Court to introspect the SEC’s expansive reach. The primary driver behind this is the growing apprehension concerning heightened regulatory actions.

This sentiment of unease has intensified in recent times. An instance of this is when a federal judge based in New York expressed dissent against the SEC’s stringent approach regarding cryptocurrency regulations.

Such heavy-handed tactics from the regulatory body have also caught the attention and concern of several members of Congress. They opine that the SEC might be overstepping its boundaries, overshadowing the legislative body’s role in sculpting securities regulations.

A pivotal element in this legal maze has been the invocation of the “Howey test” by Judge Torres during the Ripple judgment. Originating from a Supreme Court case dated back eight decades involving Florida citrus groves, this test serves as a benchmark for discerning investment contracts.

The Howey test propounds that a security is characterized by a promoter’s pledge to undertake particular actions that promise profits for its investors. The very existence and application of this test might provide a valid ground for the Supreme Court to take a more active role in this matter, making the future of Ripple’s position even more intriguing.

---

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News