The US Securities and Exchange Commission is trying to prevent XRP holders from joining the ongoing lawsuit as a third party.
In a letter to Judge Analisa Torres, SEC Senior Trial Attorney Jorge Tenreiro argued that XRP owners had failed to clarify their actions. Additionally, Tenreiro states that consolidating / coordinating claims without the approval of the SEC is prohibited by law.
“The plaintiffs do not state what claims they would have against whom in this lawsuit if the court allowed them to intervene. However, Congress has prohibited the consolidation or coordination of claims by law without the approval of the SEC, and sovereign immunity freezes Movants’ claims against the SEC. That alone rules out the intervention proposed by Movants. “
XRP owners want a representation
The ongoing legal action against Ripple has become a complex case, spanning multiple motions, each of which requires judgment. In this latest example, the SEC responded to a pre-petition letter from Attorney John Deaton.
Deaton called on Judge Torres to allow the intervention of over ten thousand XRP holders. This would ensure that the case takes into account the interests of all parties involved and ensures that those interests are “fully and vigorously defended”. He argues that this is necessary because neither the SEC nor Ripple represent the owners of XRP.
“It is appropriate for us to intervene as neither party is currently representing the owners and users of XRP. A key aspect of Ripple’s defense will be to show that they have no duty or obligation to XRP holders. Given the actions taken by the SEC to date, we cannot expect it to even consider the interests of XRP holders. “
While the SEC denies this argument, Ripple’s attorneys have not objected to the intervention of XRP holders.
THE @ SEC_Enforcement ITEMS FOR THE VOICES OF #XRPHOLDERS HEARD IN A CASE YOU ALLEGED. co / dpwAD8zuKD
– John E Deaton (@ JohnEDeaton1) March 27, 2021
SEC has no more room to maneuver
Attorney Jeremy Hogan, who is not involved in the case, rated the intervention as “trouble for the SEC”.
An integral part of the SEC’s case against Ripple is the claim that XRP, which Ripple is currently selling, are unregistered securities. This means that all XRPs are unregistered securities, including those held by XRP holders.
Hogan points out that the purpose of the SEC is to protect investors. But ten thousand XRP owners reported that they had been harmed and not protected by the actions of the SEC. This plays a role in Ripple’s strategy of destroying the SEC’s case for failing to consider the secondary market.
“The SEC just wants a vague ruling that sales are sales of unregulated securities, and makes a vague promise to the judge: ‘Don’t worry, Judge, we’re not going to pursue the secondary market, of course not, we’re the good guys , we stand up for the little people. ‘”
In objecting to the intervention, the SEC is somewhat angry because it shows that its allegations are ill-defined. Is XRP inherently a security? Or is the lawsuit just about sales of Ripple and Garlinghouse?
Source: XRPUSD on TradingView.com