In a recent development surrounding the ongoing legal battle between Ripple and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), legal commentator Ashley Prosper has outlined specific circumstances under which Judge Analisa Torres may choose to withdraw her previous decision in the case.
Judge Torres recently declined a joint request from both Ripple and the SEC seeking an “indicative ruling” that would permit settlement discussions to proceed based on revised terms.
The proposal aimed to replace the previously ordered $125 million penalty and permanent injunction against Ripple with a significantly reduced $50 million fine and no injunction. Her rejection of the motion was not based on the content of the agreement but rather on procedural deficiencies in the request submitted to the court.
While the parties are anticipated to file a corrected version of the motion shortly, Prosper has suggested that certain high-level interventions or disclosures could alter the trajectory of the case, potentially leading Judge Torres to vacate her prior judgment.
Circumstances That Could Justify a Reversal
According to Prosper, one possibility is the submission of confidential evidence showing that XRP holds strategic relevance to the federal government. This may include classified documentation from agencies such as the U.S. Treasury or the Department of Justice (DOJ).
#XRP #XRPCommunity
What Could Force Judge Torres to Vacate her Judgment?
🔒 A. Classified or Confidential Federal Interest
If either the SEC or Ripple presents sealed evidence (e.g., ex parte communications from the U.S. Treasury, Fed, or DOJ), Judge Torres would be required to…— Ashley PROSPER (@AshleyPROSPER1) May 21, 2025
For instance, internal memos indicating XRP’s potential role in a proposed national digital currency infrastructure, or security assessments warning that the continuation of the lawsuit could negatively affect financial or diplomatic stability, could compel the court to reconsider.
Such materials would likely be presented under seal due to their sensitive nature. Prosper noted that courts sometimes adjust or vacate rulings when matters of national interest are credibly demonstrated, particularly if high-ranking government agencies are involved.
We are on twitter, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1
— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) July 15, 2023
Executive Branch Involvement Could Influence Outcome
Another pathway to reconsideration, Prosper added, would be direct involvement from the federal executive branch. If entities like the Treasury Department or the Federal Reserve were to submit an amicus curiae brief urging the court to reconsider its position, this could introduce significant legal weight. These agencies might argue that XRP plays a critical role in the national or international financial system.
Prosper further explained that the court could apply the principle of Chevron deference, which allows judicial bodies to give weight to federal agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous legislative provisions, especially in matters falling within their expertise. Although infrequent, similar interventions have led to judicial reversals in past financial and regulatory cases.
Implications and Community Response
If either classified documentation or federal agency participation redefines XRP as essential to government financial strategy, Judge Torres could vacate her original ruling. Such a decision could mark a shift in how XRP is legally classified and utilized, potentially positioning it as a key tool in national financial infrastructure rather than a conventional crypto asset.
Nevertheless, some voices within the cryptocurrency community have expressed skepticism, arguing that the scenarios proposed are largely speculative and improbable. Despite this, Prosper maintains that these legal avenues remain viable, depending on the direction taken by both Ripple and the U.S. government in the coming months.
Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are urged to do in-depth research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.
Follow us on X, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News
