Ripple CEO Claims SEC Is Not Interested In Applying The Law

Ripple Labs Inc. filed the motion for a summary judgment earlier today, with Brad Garlinghouse slamming the SEC by claiming it is only concerned with expanding its jurisdiction beyond securities.
Dot
January 29, 2023
Ayush Pande

As a tech enthusiast who's always on the prowl for the latest developments concerning crypto and hardware, you can find him covering news stories or tinkering with PCs.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
According to Brad Garlinghouse’s tweet, “Today's filings make it clear the SEC isn’t interested in applying the law. They want to remake it all in an impermissible effort to expand their jurisdiction far beyond the authority granted to them by Congress.”

Ripple Labs Inc. filed the motion for a summary judgment earlier today, with Brad Garlinghouse slamming the SEC by claiming it is only concerned with expanding its jurisdiction beyond securities.

In December 2020, the SEC filed a lawsuit against Ripple Labs Inc. over allegations of raising $1.3B by selling the XRP tokens as unregistered offerings. The lawsuit highlighted that Brad Garlinghouse, the company’s CEO, and executive chairman Chris Larsen aided Ripple’s law violations.

The blockchain company has since engaged in a long drawn-out legal battle with the SEC. 

However, the upcoming weeks seems to be a turning point in the case as Ripple filed motions for a summary judgment with the SEC earlier today. The document notes that the SEC intends to turn the sale of all ordinary assets into securities despite the Congress not granting the SEC the authority to do so.

Moreover, since the XRP token does not possess the features of an “investment contract,” the SEC cannot claim that the token’s sale satisfies the Supreme Court’s Howey Test.

The document states, 

“According to the SEC, there can be an “investment contract” without any contract, without any rights granted to the purchaser, and without any obligations on the issuer. That is not and should not be the law, because without these essential features there is nothing to which the Howey test can sensibly be applied.”

Stuart Alderoty, General Counsel at Ripple, also took a dig at the SEC by citing the regulatory firm failed to identify any contract of investment despite two years of litigation.

Ripple CEO Claims SEC Is Not Interested In Applying The Law

HomeCrypto regulation
Contents
According to Brad Garlinghouse’s tweet, “Today's filings make it clear the SEC isn’t interested in applying the law. They want to remake it all in an impermissible effort to expand their jurisdiction far beyond the authority granted to them by Congress.”

Ripple Labs Inc. filed the motion for a summary judgment earlier today, with Brad Garlinghouse slamming the SEC by claiming it is only concerned with expanding its jurisdiction beyond securities.

In December 2020, the SEC filed a lawsuit against Ripple Labs Inc. over allegations of raising $1.3B by selling the XRP tokens as unregistered offerings. The lawsuit highlighted that Brad Garlinghouse, the company’s CEO, and executive chairman Chris Larsen aided Ripple’s law violations.

The blockchain company has since engaged in a long drawn-out legal battle with the SEC. 

However, the upcoming weeks seems to be a turning point in the case as Ripple filed motions for a summary judgment with the SEC earlier today. The document notes that the SEC intends to turn the sale of all ordinary assets into securities despite the Congress not granting the SEC the authority to do so.

Moreover, since the XRP token does not possess the features of an “investment contract,” the SEC cannot claim that the token’s sale satisfies the Supreme Court’s Howey Test.

The document states, 

“According to the SEC, there can be an “investment contract” without any contract, without any rights granted to the purchaser, and without any obligations on the issuer. That is not and should not be the law, because without these essential features there is nothing to which the Howey test can sensibly be applied.”

Stuart Alderoty, General Counsel at Ripple, also took a dig at the SEC by citing the regulatory firm failed to identify any contract of investment despite two years of litigation.

Ayush Pande

As a tech enthusiast who's always on the prowl for the latest developments concerning crypto and hardware, you can find him covering news stories or tinkering with PCs.

According to Brad Garlinghouse’s tweet, “Today's filings make it clear the SEC isn’t interested in applying the law. They want to remake it all in an impermissible effort to expand their jurisdiction far beyond the authority granted to them by Congress.”

Ripple Labs Inc. filed the motion for a summary judgment earlier today, with Brad Garlinghouse slamming the SEC by claiming it is only concerned with expanding its jurisdiction beyond securities.

In December 2020, the SEC filed a lawsuit against Ripple Labs Inc. over allegations of raising $1.3B by selling the XRP tokens as unregistered offerings. The lawsuit highlighted that Brad Garlinghouse, the company’s CEO, and executive chairman Chris Larsen aided Ripple’s law violations.

The blockchain company has since engaged in a long drawn-out legal battle with the SEC. 

However, the upcoming weeks seems to be a turning point in the case as Ripple filed motions for a summary judgment with the SEC earlier today. The document notes that the SEC intends to turn the sale of all ordinary assets into securities despite the Congress not granting the SEC the authority to do so.

Moreover, since the XRP token does not possess the features of an “investment contract,” the SEC cannot claim that the token’s sale satisfies the Supreme Court’s Howey Test.

The document states, 

“According to the SEC, there can be an “investment contract” without any contract, without any rights granted to the purchaser, and without any obligations on the issuer. That is not and should not be the law, because without these essential features there is nothing to which the Howey test can sensibly be applied.”

Stuart Alderoty, General Counsel at Ripple, also took a dig at the SEC by citing the regulatory firm failed to identify any contract of investment despite two years of litigation.

Written by
Ayush Pande