XRP News Today: Ripple's Legal Strategy Shifts After SEC's Appeal

The legal dispute between Ripple Labs and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has reached a pivotal stage, with both parties now awaiting Judge Analisa Torres’ ruling on the revised settlement motion filed on June 12.

Legal expert and XRP advocate Bill Morgan has provided new insights, suggesting that the SEC’s aggressive appeal strategy may have prompted Ripple to seek more than it initially intended. Following Judge Torres’ July 2023 summary judgment, the court delivered a mixed decision: XRP sales on exchanges and through algorithms were not considered securities transactions, but institutional sales were found to violate federal securities laws. At that time, Ripple seemed prepared to accept the ruling in its entirety, including the less favorable determination on institutional sales.

According to Bill Morgan, this might have remained the case had the SEC not filed an appeal challenging the court’s decision on programmatic sales. “It seems likely to me,” Morgan wrote on X, “that had the SEC not filed an appeal of the summary judgment decision… Ripple would not have filed an appeal on the institutional sales part… and the parties would have just moved on.” In other words, the SEC’s decision to appeal a partial loss reignited the conflict and shifted Ripple’s legal strategy.

The SEC’s aggressive posture, consistent with Chair Gary Gensler’s broader enforcement-first regulatory strategy, may have unintentionally strengthened Ripple’s resolve. As Morgan observed, “The SEC’s new policy towards enforcement has encouraged Ripple to seek more than it would have been satisfied with or lived with before the SEC filed its appeal.” Instead of settling for a partial win, Ripple now appears determined to challenge not only the SEC’s appeal but also to revisit the unfavorable ruling on institutional sales. This pivot signals a more assertive strategy from Ripple—one that aims not just to defend its past conduct but to shape future precedent for digital assets across the U.S. regulatory landscape.

Earlier this year, Ripple and the SEC jointly submitted a proposed judgment on the remedies phase of the case. However, on procedural grounds, Judge Torres declined to accept the proposal, requiring a refile. That amended motion was submitted on June 12, and both parties are now awaiting her decision. The stakes remain high. The remedies phase could determine whether Ripple will pay financial penalties for its institutional XRP sales, and whether any further injunctive relief will be imposed. Should the judge’s ruling be unfavorable to Ripple, the company has signaled it may appeal the original finding that institutional sales constituted unregistered securities offerings.

The Ripple case has become a defining battle in the broader struggle over how digital assets are regulated in the United States. Judge Torres’ original ruling marked the first time a federal court distinguished between different types of token sales, and her upcoming decision could further clarify, or complicate, the legal framework for crypto firms operating in the U.S. Bill Morgan’s analysis underscores a broader irony: by challenging a partial loss, the SEC may have triggered Ripple’s decision to fight harder. A case that could have quietly wrapped up under mutually accepted terms has now grown into a legal crucible that may influence crypto regulation for years to come. As the industry awaits Judge Torres’ next ruling, one thing is clear: what the SEC intended as pressure has instead emboldened one of the crypto industry’s most high-profile companies to ask for more.