XRP News Today: SEC's XRP ETF Dilemma: Decentralization or Central Control?

Pro-Ripple attorney Bill Morgan has intensified his defense of the XRP Ledger (XRPL), citing SEC filings for XRP ETF applications as irrefutable evidence of the blockchain's decentralized and permissionless nature. Morgan emphasized that the legal disclosures in these filings—reviewed by financial institutions and subject to regulatory scrutiny—explicitly describe XRPL as a public, decentralized network. "If XRPL weren't decentralized, these institutions couldn't legally describe it that way," he stated in a Coinpedia report. This argument counters recent claims by crypto analyst Justin Bons, who criticized XRP as centralized and permissioned in a Currency Analytics article, comparing its consensus mechanism to Proof of Authority (PoA) systems.

Bons' assertions hinge on the role of Unique Node Lists (UNLs), which he argues are curated by the XRP Foundation and require user trust in pre-approved validators. He likened this structure to PoA, where a central authority appoints validators, contrasting it with Proof of Stake (PoS) or Proof of Work (PoW) models. Bons further highlighted the lack of financial incentives for validators in XRPL, stating this undermines trustlessness in that Currency Analytics article. However, former Ripple developer Matt Hamilton refuted these claims, noting that every node in XRPL can independently curate its UNL. "The power to choose trusted nodes lies with individual participants, not a central authority," Hamilton explained in the same piece.

The debate carries significant regulatory weight, as the SEC's classification of XRP as a security hinges on its decentralization. In July 2023, Judge Analisa Torres ruled that XRP is not a security, a decision Ripple and the XRP community have used to bolster their case, as noted in a CryptoPulpit analysis. Morgan clarified that Ripple's legal defense does not rely on decentralization but on the Howey test, which determines whether an asset qualifies as an investment contract, a point also covered in that analysis. Despite this, Bons and critics argue that the XRP Foundation's control over UNLs and its ability to modify validator lists in real-time create a de facto centralized system, as alleged in the Currency Analytics piece.

The XRP community has rallied behind Morgan's stance, with figures like crypto commentator Moon Lambo condemning critics for spreading "deliberate dishonesty." Lambo argued that the legal and financial industry's reliance on XRPL's decentralization—despite potential misinformation—strengthens its credibility for institutional adoption, a position previously reported by Coinpedia. This sentiment aligns with the broader implications of the debate: if XRPL were centralized, it would face regulatory hurdles and reduced institutional interest. Conversely, the consistent characterization of XRP as decentralized in ETF filings enhances its legitimacy, according to earlier reporting.

Meanwhile, the SEC's approval of XRP ETFs remains a focal point. Six XRP ETFs, including the Rex-Osprey XRPR, are already trading, while dozens more await decisions. Analysts project $5–$7 billion in inflows if multiple applications are approved, potentially boosting XRP's price and liquidity, according to the CCN tracker. However, Bons warned that the XRP Foundation's control could enable censorship or network halts with minimal validator support, diverging from conventional decentralized models, as he argued in the Currency Analytics article.

The debate underscores the nuanced nature of decentralization in blockchain technology. While XRPL's node autonomy challenges centralization claims, the role of the XRP Foundation in validator governance remains contentious. As the SEC's October 2025 deadlines approach, the outcome of XRP ETF approvals could set a precedent for regulatory treatment of altcoins, influencing the broader crypto market, per the CCN tracker.