- Legal expert Scott Chamberlain analyzes the recent SEC v. Ripple ruling, doubting its progression to the Supreme Court.
- Judge Analisa Torres denies the SEC’s interlocutory appeal request, cementing XRP’s status as not being a security.
Unpacking the Ripple Ruling: A Shift in Legal Landscape
The crypto world remains abuzz with the unfolding dynamics of the SEC v. Ripple case. In a recent turn of events, Judge Analisa Torres ruled against the SEC’s motion for an interlocutory appeal, steering the trajectory of the case in a significant direction.
Why a Supreme Court Faceoff Appears Dim
Leading legal expert, Scott Chamberlain, in deciphering the implications of this ruling, has shared insights which signal a lower likelihood of the case reaching the Supreme Court. Chamberlain emphasizes that although avenues for appeal remain open for the SEC, the factual underpinnings established so far create a challenging landscape for a triumphant appeal.
Chamberlain elaborated, arguing that the lawsuit’s core issues do not revolve around uncharted legal territories. Instead, the challenge remains in
“applying established law to a nuanced factual framework,”
which, in his view, does not favor the SEC’s narrative. Using a candid metaphor, he conveyed the uphill battle the SEC now faces, stating that they need to
“push sh*t uphill with a pointy stick”
for any hope of victory.
I think this is more significant than people realise. Yes, the SEC can appeal later, but it is stuck with shitty factual record that makes successful appeal much more difficult. It also means Supreme Court is less likely destination – there’s no major legal questions to decide,… https://t.co/f6dOvo2fDt
— Scott Chamberlain | 🏴☠️ 🪝 (@scotty2ten) October 4, 2023
Echoing this sentiment, other legal figures within the XRP community weighed in. Attorney Jeremy Hogan of Hogan & Hogan lauded Chamberlain’s observations, expressing interest in leveraging his remarks.
Judge Torres’ Determination on Appeal Request
In a detailed review of the SEC’s motion, Judge Torres tackled the SEC’s argument concerning the court’s prior July 13 verdict on Ripple’s sales and distributions. The SEC posited that this decision raised vital legal questions and suggested potential divergent interpretations.
However, Judge Torres clarified her stance, underscoring that the July 13 findings did not unearth new legal questions as projected by the SEC. She highlighted the SEC’s failure to sufficiently substantiate the existence of varied opinions on the matter.
With this denial of the SEC’s appeal bid, the regulatory body is now relegated to awaiting the lawsuit’s concluding parts, notably the impending trial, prior to launching a comprehensive appeal.
Setting the Legal Benchmark
Amidst this evolving legal tapestry, Ripple CLO Stuart Alderoty accentuated the enduring relevance of Judge Torres’ July 13 pronouncement. This verdict solidified that XRP, in its essence, is not a security. Furthermore, while Ripple’s institutional XRP sales were deemed investment contracts, other sales and distributions were excluded from this categorization. This delineation, as Alderoty underscores, stands firm as the
“law of the land,”
unless counteracted by higher judicial authorities such as the Second Circuit or Supreme Court.
