Title: Ripple vs. SEC: Judge Denies Settlement Bid Citing Procedural Errors Amid Crypto Legal ShiftIn a dramatic twist in the high-profile legal battle between Ripple Labs and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres has denied a joint settlement motion submitted by both parties. The move, which comes after a four-year court fight and recent attempts by Ripple and the SEC to resolve the matter, has sent ripples across the cryptocurrency landscape.
Background: The Ripple-SEC Legal Saga
The origins of the case date back to December 2020, when the SEC filed a lawsuit against Ripple Labs, accusing the company of raising $1.3 billion through the unregistered sale of XRP, its native cryptocurrency. The lawsuit became a cornerstone legal case in the crypto industry, with massive implications for how digital assets are classified and regulated in the U.S.
Judge Torres delivered a partial ruling in July 2023 that sent shockwaves through the crypto world. She determined that Ripple’s institutional sales of XRP did violate securities laws, but that its exchange-based retail sales did not—offering a partial victory to Ripple and a glimmer of hope to the wider crypto sector.
The legal drama appeared to be nearing a resolution in recent weeks as both Ripple and the SEC signaled their intent to end the court fight and move forward. But this week’s decision shows that procedural hurdles still stand in the way.
The Proposed Settlement
In a rare show of alignment, Ripple and the SEC jointly filed a motion seeking what is known as an “indicative ruling” from Judge Torres. This is essentially a non-binding signal from a trial court that it would approve a proposed resolution—provided it regains jurisdiction from an appellate court.
The proposed agreement involved dissolving Ripple’s permanent injunction and reducing its financial penalty from $125 million to $50 million. Ripple would pay the lower fine, and the remaining $75 million—currently held in escrow—would be returned to the company.
But the motion hit a roadblock. Judge Torres rejected the request, asserting that she lacked jurisdiction to consider the motion while the case remained on appeal in the Second Circuit Court. Moreover, she criticized the motion for being “procedurally improper,” stating that even if she did have jurisdiction, she would still deny it.
Legal Missteps: Why the Judge Denied the Motion
The main issue, according to Judge Torres’ May 15 order, was the parties' failure to follow established legal procedure. Specifically, the motion bypassed Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which governs how a party can seek relief from a final judgment. Under Rule 60, parties must demonstrate “exceptional circumstances” that justify reopening a case.
“The parties have made no effort to satisfy that burden here; their request does not even mention the Rule,” Torres wrote in her ruling. Her message was clear: the legal system has rules, and even mutually agreed settlements must follow them.
Adding to the complexity is the fact that the case remains under the jurisdiction of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Both Ripple and the SEC had filed cross-appeals following the final judgment in August 2024 but jointly requested the appellate court to suspend those proceedings last month as they pursued a negotiated resolution.
However, the Second Circuit has not yet ruled on that request. This means that the lower court, led by Judge Torres, currently has no authority to act unless the higher court remands the case back.
What Comes Next?
While this decision temporarily stalls the settlement, it is not necessarily the end of the road. Both Ripple and the SEC appear committed to resolving the matter without further litigation. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Ripple Chief Legal Officer Stuart Alderoty reaffirmed this commitment.
“Nothing in today’s order changes Ripple’s wins,” Alderoty tweeted. “Ripple and the SEC are fully in agreement to resolve this case and will revisit this issue with the Court, together.”
This signals that both parties are likely to file a revised motion—this time adhering to Rule 60 requirements—or wait for a response from the Second Circuit regarding jurisdiction.
The Bigger Picture: A Changing SEC Approach
This case is also unfolding in the context of a broader shift in regulatory attitudes toward cryptocurrency in the United States. Since President Donald Trump’s return to office, the SEC—now under new leadership—has been dialing back its aggressive stance on crypto enforcement.
Former acting SEC chair Mark Uyeda had already begun scaling back enforcement actions, and the newly confirmed SEC Chair Paul Atkins, sworn in last month, is widely expected to adopt a more lenient approach than his predecessor, Gary Gensler.
Notably, the SEC has already dropped lawsuits against several major crypto platforms, including Coinbase and Kraken. The Ripple case may soon follow, depending on how the courts respond to the next round of filings.
Market Reaction: XRP Dips Despite Long-Term Gains
Despite the legal turbulence, XRP has performed impressively over the past year. According to data from CoinGecko, XRP is up more than 366% year-over-year. However, it did slip slightly following the latest court development, trading down 1.6% at $2.42 on the day.
Still, the market seems to be reacting with cautious optimism. Investors may be interpreting the procedural denial not as a rejection of the settlement itself, but as a temporary hiccup in what is likely to be a final resolution.
Conclusion: A Temporary Setback in a Landmark Case
Judge Torres’ recent ruling is a reminder that legal processes—especially those with major regulatory implications—must be followed to the letter. While the SEC and Ripple’s settlement may ultimately be approved, it will require more careful navigation through procedural rules and the appellate process.
For now, the crypto industry continues to watch closely. The outcome of the Ripple case will likely set precedent for how digital assets are treated under U.S. law in the years to come.
Stay tuned for more updates as this pivotal case unfolds.
0 Comments