The legal battle between Ripple and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) continues, and many are asking: Why didn’t Judge Analisa Torres dismiss the case, which has dragged on for years? Former SEC attorney Marc Fagel offered insight on platform X, shedding light on the reasoning behind her decision.


🔹 Ripple Accused of Unregistered Securities Sales

Fagel explained that Judge Torres likely refused to dismiss the case because she found that Ripple had raised hundreds of millions of dollars through unregistered securities sales. That, according to Fagel, justified the continuation of the legal proceedings.

Fagel commented:

“Probably because she found that Ripple illegally raised hundreds of millions from unregistered securities sales. Why would she ‘give up’ (whatever that means)?”


🔹 Ripple Agrees to $50 Million Penalty

Recently, Judge Torres denied a joint motion by Ripple and the SEC to conclude the lawsuit. Ripple then withdrew its appeal and agreed to pay a $50 million penalty, though that didn’t stop further debate about whether the case has served its intended purpose.


🔹 Has the Case Helped the SEC Fulfill Its Mission?

Some users on platform X questioned whether the case truly advanced the SEC’s core mission—protecting investors, maintaining fair markets, and facilitating capital formation. Fagel responded:

“If a company doesn’t want to comply with federal laws, it should try to change them—not decide for itself which ones matter.”


🔹 Why Wasn’t Ethereum Part of the Case?

Fagel also noted that a judge can only rule on cases that are formally brought before them—explaining why Ethereum wasn’t addressed in the Ripple lawsuit. He added that Judge Torres’s role in the Ripple case is effectively over:

“Judge Torres no longer has any further role in this case. Her ruling becomes final once the SEC formally drops its appeal and submits it to the appeals court, which hasn’t happened yet.”


🔹 Permanent Ban on Institutional XRP Sales?

The court ruling also classified institutional XRP sales as securities offerings, meaning Ripple must either halt these sales or comply with securities laws.

Attorney Bill Morgan, a known legal voice in the XRP community, pointed out that Ripple is now preparing for a permanent injunction on these "historical institutional sales." Contrary to claims that the injunction only addresses past sales, Morgan clarified:

“A court injunction like the one issued against Ripple is meant to restrict current or future conduct. It can’t apply to past behavior that already occurred.”



#RippleVsSEC , #Ripple , #xrp , #SEC , #CryptoNews

Stay one step ahead – follow our profile and stay informed about everything important in the world of cryptocurrencies!

Notice:

,,The information and views presented in this article are intended solely for educational purposes and should not be taken as investment advice in any situation. The content of these pages should not be regarded as financial, investment, or any other form of advice. We caution that investing in cryptocurrencies can be risky and may lead to financial losses.“