Members of the Ripple and XRP communities are awaiting the next development in the Ripple vs. SEC lawsuit—a long-standing legal battle that began in December 2020.
While Ripple supporters expressed excitement over Judge Analisa Torres’s 2023 court ruling, which established that the secondary sale of the XRP token does not make the asset a security, it remains uncertain where the case is headed this time.
In the most recent development, Ripple and the SEC filed a joint motion requesting that $125 million be released from the escrow account, $50 million be distributed to the SEC as settlement costs, and the remaining funds be transferred to Ripple.
As market onlookers await the Judge’s decision, Pro-crypto attorney John Deaton has taken to X to provide clarity on what he believes could happen next.
Countering claims that he and another pro-crypto attorney Fred Rispoli wanted the SEC to suck up to Anilsa Torres’ with its most recent filing, he made the following remark;
“That’s not it. In fact, I believe there’s a 70% chance she grants the relief requested, and I’ll discuss it more in detail tomorrow. What I was expecting wasn’t ass kissing. And know, I’m not being super critical of the lawyers who filed it. They’re much more experienced than I am in these matters and experience is the greatest teacher in life. In fact, the lawyer who signed on behalf of Ripple is a former SEC Director of Enforcement.”
He detailed his expectations for the regulator’s lawyers, explaining that he had hoped that the regulator would acknowledge the role of the former leadership in what he regards as an over-surveillance of the crypto industry.
The attorney laid out his expectations for the attorneys behind Ripple, stating that the crypto firm failed to highlight the disadvantages that new regulatory policies could have on the broader crypto market, despite the current court order placing competitor firms like Circle miles ahead of Ripple.
Despite maintaining that the joint motion is more likely to be granted than it is to be rejected, Deaton remains convinced that a stronger case should have been made to “get a [the] judge to rescind her ruling that she firmly believes (whether right or wrong) is consistent with existing law instead of assuming she’ll grant it because you cite a couple cases for her to hang her hat on to grant it – IF she so chooses.”
