Legal Experts Scrutinize SEC’s Plan to Disgorge $876 Million in Ripple Lawsuit
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is filing a lawsuit against Ripple, demanding that they return money from the sales of XRP, a cryptocurrency. However, lawyers are criticizing the SEC’s plan to give the money back to institutional buyers, arguing that it is unfair. Ripple agrees that they should return the money, but not to investors who have already made a profit.
As the legal battle between the SEC and Ripple unfolds, legal experts are sharing their views on the SEC’s demand for disgorgement. Attorney James Murphy, known as “MetaLawMan” on X, has pointed out what he considers to be the “crazy” aspect of the SEC’s request. He quotes the U.S. Supreme Court, stating that disgorgement is meant to go to the victims. Murphy questions why the SEC is proposing to give the disgorgement funds to institutional buyers of XRP, as this would only benefit parties who have already profited from their dealings with Ripple.
This demand from the SEC has raised concerns among legal circles. Murphy and others express skepticism about how the funds will be distributed, suggesting that institutional buyers may disproportionately benefit from it. Consequently, the legal dispute between Ripple and the SEC centers around the issue of disgorgement.
Ripple has made it clear in their legal documents that they reject the idea of giving the money back. They contradict Murphy’s claims, stating that all other institutional investors were given enough time before being asked to return their profits. The company believes that institutional buyers should not receive money from the $876 million disgorgement, as they were allowed to invest and operate within the complex regulations of cryptocurrencies.
Attorney Bill Morgan, echoing James Murphy’s sentiment, argues on behalf of Ripple that the SEC’s theory of pecuniary harm ignores the contractual and commercial reality.
As the legal process continues, both Ripple and the SEC are navigating a complex case by filing necessary briefs and motions. Currently, the focus is on blanket motions that aim to seal confidential information related to the remedies briefs. The court’s ruling on this matter could significantly impact the direction of the case.
In addition to this ongoing legal battle, it is worth considering the broader implications for the crypto market as a whole. This case extends beyond Ripple and could have far-reaching effects. Share your insights on this matter.
Tags: Ripple (XRP)