- A memo from 2018 has sparked a new wave of conversation about the SEC’s previous stance on the XRP token and its position in the market.
- Attorney John Deaton explains in-depth, why SEC enforcement lawyers are holding back from providing clarity on Ripppe’s position in the market.
The ongoing Ripple legal battle with the SEC has spurred continuous conversations between lawyers and Ripple supporters alike. As a result, a new layer to the case has been discovered. According to a newly attained memo, the SEC’s previous position on the XRP token and its classification in the market seems to be very different from its current position.
Popular lawyer Bill Morgan, spotlighted the SEC stance on XRP in a recent post on X, formerly known as Twitter. Attorney John Deaton went on the expand on the topic, highlighting the SEC’s previous position on XRP’s status.
As Deaton asserts, although some market players are implying that the memo revealed that XRP was in fact not a security, this was not the case at all. Despite the memo being found to be “privileged,” it did not explicitly state that the XRP token was or wasn’t a security. John Deaton wrote in response.
To be clear, I didn’t say the memo concluded XRP is not a security. The memo was found to be privileged and not disclosed so I haven’t read exactly what it says. But Judge Netburn found it important to note that the authors of the memo, who were Enforcement lawyers at the SEC, did NOT recommend any action be taken.
Deaton makes a strong case for Ripple executives
In addition, he goes on to explain that as of June 13, 2018, the memo did not contain any concluding statements on the XRP’s classification in the cryptocurrency market. However, if a classification was made, a recommendation for enforcement or some action would have followed
The lawyer remains critical of SEC enforcement lawyers, asserting that they are unlikely to conclude that XRP is a security but will instead continue to allow Ripple to violate the law.
He goes on to make a strong case for Ripple executives, as he explains that the SEC cannot possibly charge Ripple execs for facilitating the sale of XRP as a security when the SEC itself could not conclude on XRP’s position in the market back in 2018.
In his words;
“As Gensler says, the SEC is an enforcement agency. Most likely, the memo was inconclusive. The major point here is that if enforcement lawyers at the SEC struggled to conclude XRP was a security in 2018, how can it be that Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsens were reckless in not knowing XRP was being sold as a security in 2013-2015 and on.”
Deaton’s recent posts come not long after the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission stated, in a motion to the Supreme Court Judge, Analisa Torres, that the XRP token has no intrinsic value.
