The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Ripple Labs have both asked for an federal judge to issue an immediate decision on the issue of whether Ripple’s XRP sales infringed U.S. securities laws.
Separate motions were filed September. 17 filed by the Ripple as well as The SEC The SEC and Ripple have requested the entry of a summary judgment in the U.S. District Court Southern District of New York.
Summary judgments are presented by the courts when the party is convinced that there’s enough evidence available to render a decision without the need to go to trial.
Related: The new administration thwarts Ripple’s ambition to tokenize Colombian property.
Both parties have asked Judge Analisa Torres , who is the judge in charge, to issue an immediate decision on whether or not Ripple’s XRP sales were in violation of U.S. securities laws. Ripple has claimed that the SEC is out of evidence to show XRP sales were the definition of an “investment contract,” while the SEC remains firm in its conviction that it does.
Ripple Chief Executive Officer Brad Garlinghouse in a Twitter post on September. 17 said that the filings proved that 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,” he added.
In the meantime, Ripple general counsel Stuart Alderoty pointed out his client that “after two years of litigation” the SEC has been “unable to identify any contract for investment” and “cannot satisfy a single prong of the Supreme Court Howey test.”
With its request for summary judgment Ripple asserted it was the case of SEC “boils down to an impermissibly open-ended assertion of jurisdiction over any transfer of an asset.”
It also claimed that the SEC could not prove an argument that XRP token holders cannot “reasonably expect profits” based on Ripple’s efforts since there was no contractual obligation to Ripple as well as XRP the holders of tokens.
On the other hand the SEC’s own motion to summary judgment claimed that it is possible to have an “investment contract” without a contract, and without any benefits granted to the buyer and with no commitments to an issuer.
However, Ripple said in it’s motion “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.”
Related to: Related: SEC and the U.S. Ripple lawsuit: Everything you must be aware of
Ripple instead emphasized the profits derived out of “market forces of supply and demand,” which is what SEC “conceded” according to the Ripple motion.
This admission’s significance was made clear by U.S. Attorney Jeremy Hogan in an September. 17 tweet on Twitter in which he said”that “these concessions are perfect for a summary judgment.”
Community reaction of the community
The filing of Ripple motions and SEC motions triggered generally positive reactions in the XRP community and one Twitter user who believed “the end is near”:
This motion to dismiss summary judgement comes almost two years after the SEC brought suit against Ripple, former CEO Christian Larsen and current CEO Brad Garlinghouse in Dec. 2020 over alleged robbing $1.3 billion through unregistered security transactions through the XRP.
Related: XRP/PKR: Ripple Price in Pakistan on July 14, 2022
If the court decides to grant the summary decision, the ruling of the court will have a significant influence on determining whether cryptos are securities under U.S. law on securities.
The XRP token reached highs that had not been seen since the beginning of July after the motion filed and a price of close to $0.40, but it has slowed down since then and is currently trading at $0.34 according to CoinGecko.
