XRP Lawsuit Not Yet Over, SEC Must Drop Appeal- Warns Lawyer

The protracted XRP lawsuit is not entirely over yet despite Ripple’s withdrawal of its cross-appeal against the SEC. Though the XRP community celebrates the long-awaited Ripple vs SEC case settlement, lawyer Marc Fagel asserts that the lawsuit will not fully end until the commission drops its appeal.

Why Is XRP Lawsuit Not Over Yet?

Former SEC lawyer Marc Fagel offers a contrarian view to the jubilant claims that the XRP lawsuit is over, stating that the case remains unresolved. According to him, the Ripple lawsuit will remain ongoing until the SEC votes to drop their appeal. However, in an X post, he expressed confidence that the SEC will ultimately drop its appeal, leading to the final settlement of the case.

This development has raised questions about the scope of the SEC’s previous vote, specifically whether it included authorization to drop the appeal when they agreed to the settlement. XRP lawyer Bill Morgan questioned Marc Fagel about this, wondering if a new vote is needed because the settlement agreement was conditional and its conditions weren’t met.

Interestingly, Fagel clarified that the SEC’s vote to authorize a settlement agreement doesn’t necessarily mean they’ve also voted to drop the case. Acknowledging the unusual nature of the situation, he highlighted the uncertainty surrounding what exactly the SEC voted on. He stated,

They voted to authorize a settlement agreement; simply dropping the case is a different action. That said, we don’t know what exactly they voted on—it would be unusual for them to have simultaneously voted to approve both options, but nothing about this is normal.

Notably, Fagel’s statement comes amid growing celebration of the alleged XRP lawsuit settlement with Ripple dropping its appeal. His words have sparked controversy, prompting many to retract their claims that the Ripple lawsuit is fully resolved. For instance, XRP lawyer Bill Morgan, who previously stated that the “SEC v Ripple lawsuit is finally, finally, OVER,” has later provided a “slight qualification,” pointing to Fagel’s statement.

Was Settling with SEC A Mistake in Lawsuit?

Despite many appreciating the reported settlement in the Ripple vs SEC case, others are criticising it, interpreting it as an admission of fault by the platform. However, dismissing these arguments, Morgan claimed,

Settlement is not an admission of fault. Most settlement agreements are made without admission of liability. Ripple has never admitted that its sales to institutions were investment contracts.

In addition, Morgan disputed the argument that the key win for Ripple lies in the conclusion that “XRP = NOT security in retail use.” Deeming this interpretation inaccurate, he added that the crucial win for Ripple stems from Judge Torres’ ruling that XRP itself is not a security, a finding grounded in the court’s reasoning. Previously, when both parties awaited Judge Torres’ decision on their joint motion, Morgan asserted that the ruling would not affect the legal status of XRP.

Furthermore, Morgan suggests that this reasoning implies XRP, independent of its sale or offering circumstances, is more akin to a commodity. This distinction is critical, as it underscores that the court’s decision didn’t hinge on the specifics of retail sales or secondary market transactions, but rather on the inherent nature of XRP.