<figure>
 <figcaption>
 Cover image via <a href="https://u.today/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">U.Today</a>
 </figcaption>
</figure>
The US Securities and Exchange Commission has&nbsp;<a href="https://x.com/FilanLaw/status/1808565903270744367" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">hit back</a> at Ripple in its response to the defendant's notice of supplemental authority.&nbsp;
As&nbsp;<a href="https://u.today/ripple-uses-binance-decision-to-bolster-its-case" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">reported by U.Today</a>, Ripple cited a recent Binance ruling in its notice to highlight that the SEC's "regulation-by-enforcement" approach is not efficient. Ripple pointed to the lack of regulatory clarity in order to bolster its argument against the agency.
However, the SEC has slammed the attempt to insert the Binance case into the ongoing remedies-related dispute. The agency's Jorge Tenreiro has noted that it is "completely irrelevant" to the current motion.&nbsp;
Moreover, the SEC argues that Ripple actually omitted one relevant part from the Binance ruling that rejected the argument that the fair notice doctrine can actually provide a defense to liability.&nbsp;
In fact, the ruling says that the agency was enforcing a "decades-old federal security statute." Moreover, it did say that the crypto industry had been put on notice by the agency with the 2017 DAO report that predates the vast majority of Ripple's XRP sales.&nbsp;
John Reed Stark, a former SEC official,&nbsp;<a href="https://x.com/JohnReedStark/status/1807056269490160055" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">argued</a> that the Binance ruling was a "mammoth loss" for the exchange.&nbsp;
The SEC has also recalled that Ripple received advice from its counsel about possible legal troubles caused by such sales, meaning that it had an actual notice.
As&nbsp;<a href="https://u.today/ripple-files-opposition-to-secs-motion-for-remedies" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">reported by U.Today</a>, Ripple filed its opposition to the agency's motion for remedies in April, arguing that the civil penalty should not be higher than $10 million. The SEC previously argued that Ripple had to shell out $2 billion.&nbsp;

"Wholly Irrelevant": SEC Hits Back at Ripple

U_Today

Other articles published on Jul 3, 2024

Future Riches: BlockDAG’s X10 Miner Eyes $6000/Day as Ethereum ETF Wobbles and Shiba Inu Dances

BlackRock Signals Interest in SOL ETF Amidst Solana’s Growing Ecosystem

Bitcoin Price Analysis: What CVD Data Reveal About the Market

Santiment Reveals Top Three Altcoins to Buy in the Midterm

Bitcoin’s Bull Run – Insights from Historical Trends: Is it Ending or Just Pausing?

Sony’s crypto debut: Tech giant acquires Amber Japan in major move

Join our free newsletter for daily crypto updates!