XRP News Today: XRP Gains Legal Clarity as Judge's Ruling Reinforces Non-Security Status

Legal expert Bill Morgan has recently criticized what he considers to be the most misleading statement of the year regarding XRP, a digital asset. Morgan, a vocal advocate for Ripple and XRP, responded to a user on June 1, 2025, who claimed that XRP lacks legal standing, institutional support, and relevance to central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). Morgan refuted this assertion, pointing to a significant ruling by Judge Analisa Torres in July 2023. The ruling determined that XRP, as a digital asset, is not inherently a security. Morgan emphasized that the SEC's appeal in October 2024 did not challenge this key finding, thereby reinforcing XRP's legal clarity.

The ruling made a crucial distinction: while Ripple’s institutional sales were classified as securities transactions, programmatic sales on exchanges were not. This legal differentiation provides XRP with a level of judicial clarity that many other cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, do not possess. Morgan argued that the judge’s commentary, known as obiter dicta, holds persuasive value in legal circles, further strengthening XRP’s position in regulatory debates. He noted that this precedent offers XRP a more defined legal status than Bitcoin, which lacks a similar court ruling.

Morgan’s analysis underscores the importance of the judge’s ruling in providing legal clarity for XRP. The obiter dicta, or the judge’s additional comments, are persuasive in legal circles and support the argument that XRP is not a security. This legal clarity is significant as it provides a stronger foundation for XRP in regulatory discussions and potential future legal challenges.

The case between Ripple and the SEC remains unresolved. Following Ripple’s partial victory, both parties are back in court awaiting settlement approval. The proposed deal would see Ripple pay $75 million of its $125 million fine, potentially forfeiting the remaining $50 million. However, the court rejected the proposed settlement, stating that the joint filing was procedurally flawed and lacked legal justification. This rejection highlights the ongoing legal complexities and the need for a more robust legal framework for digital assets.