It should be noted that the US Securities and Exchange Commission deserves to be attacked for its stance on cryptocurrencies, as the regulator has been actively creating problems for blockchain companies. In February 2023, for example, it suspended further issuance of the popular BUSD stackcoin from Paxos and Binance, causing the token’s supply to now only decline.

With this in mind, BUSD’s share of total trading on the Binance cryptocurrency exchange has fallen below 10 percent, the first time this has happened since July 2021. At the same time, the corresponding TUSD figure set a record of 24 percent. Here is the corresponding graph from the Kaiko experts.

The company then issued a $30 million fine to cryptocurrency exchange Kraken over its offering of a steaming platform for US residents, which was also somehow perceived as a security. What’s particularly frustrating: the Commission clearly has no plans to create adequate regulation of digital assets, which became clear after a recent publication by the regulator’s representatives.

And now a possible defeat for the Commission in court could set a precedent for future proceedings. In other words, representatives of various cryptostartups will no longer be so afraid of the SEC, well, the US jurisdiction itself will become more friendly to blockchain projects.

What’s going on with the lawsuit against Ripple

William Hinman is a high-ranking member of the US Securities and Exchange Commission leadership, who gave a public speech at the Yahoo Finance All Markets Summit event in June 2018. During it, he made it clear that Etherium is not a security, and this is in a position to help prove the same in relation to XRP.

As experts note, the Ripple team’s attorneys built their defense in the case against the regulator on the precedent surrounding that speech. And now the court has come out in favour of using it, thus increasing Ripple’s chances of winning the case overall.


As a reminder, the Commission filed a lawsuit against Ripple back in December 2020, with the occasion being an alleged "unregistered offering of $1.3 billion worth of securities". In other words, the agency sees the XRP token as a security that should have been pre-registered before trading began. But why should this crypto-asset be perceived in this way, when even SEC officials have previously openly referred to other coins and tokens as not securities?

It is worth noting that current SEC chairman Gary Gensler has also in the past referred to cryptocurrencies as common commodities rather than securities. The relevant clips from 2018 can be seen here.


In other words, the Commission by default considered XRP to be a security, even though the token is just as much an altcoin as Etherium. A little later, however, Fox Business published an extensive investigation into the matter, in which journalists concluded that the regulator’s staff behind the filing could have allegedly been linked to the Ethereum Foundation team. However, this is not as relevant to the case.

???? YOU CAN FIND MORE INTERESTING STUFF ON US AT YANDEX.ZEN!

According to Cointelegraph’s sources, Hinman’s speech was and is a major obstacle for the current SEC lawyers. The regulator’s petition therefore stated that it was “outweighed by the right of public access” to information that was “irrelevant” to the case. Any references to Hinman’s words are supposedly to be removed from the proceedings.

The SEC’s action in court expectedly sparked a negative reaction in the cryptocurrency fan community. On Twitter, many commentators have questioned whether current SEC chairman Gary Gensler has an ulterior motive against crypto start-ups.

This is especially suspicious in light of the heated standoff between the regulator and Coinbase, the largest US cryptocurrency exchange. As we noted, Coinbase had previously received a Wells Notice from the SEC, hinting at imminent litigation. In addition, the regulator has hinted that its actions are supposedly unlikely to be challenged, and the Commission itself is not going to develop a new set of rules to control the crypto market.


We believe the SEC deserves a defeat in this case if only because of its approach to regulating cryptocurrencies and its desire to use the Securities Act of 1933 to do so. Obviously, the digital asset industry is much more modern, and therefore a normal framework should be created for it - as it is already happening in Europe and Asia. And in the case of the Commission, a clear signal that it is wrong might just be a court decision.


Look for even more interesting things in our crypto chat room of ex-rich people. There we prepare for a new bullrun, which is bound to come sooner or later.