New York judge rejects joint SEC request (SEC) Ripple Labs offers her approval of the proposed settlement that would cut the Ripple civil fine to $50 million and dissolve a permanent ban on the company.
It’s a permanent injunction proposing a dismissal, rather than the $125 million discount imposed by the court last year – it seems to be a sticky point for Southern New York District Judge Analisa Torres. (sdny)As the SEC suggested at the time, she wrote in her ruling on Thursday that the permanent injunction for further violations of the federal securities laws was “necessary due to violations of the law and the incentives for Ripple to continue to do so.”
“Indeed, if the court should not be concerned about ripples that violate the law, why should the parties lift the injunction to tell ripples, ‘comply with the law’?” Torres wrote. “When the court imposes the injunction, it does so because it finds that ripples will continue to violate the ‘reasonable possibility’ of federal securities laws. This has not changed, and the parties claim that this is changed.”
The requirement is amid a comprehensive change from the SEC after President Donald Trump was elected in January and subsequently the election of former SEC chairman Gary Gensler. Under the new SEC, regulators have adopted a more crypto-regulatory posture, crypto-task forces led by Commissioner Hester Peirce, and have abandoned numerous investigations and lawsuits against cryptocurrency companies. But, as Torres pointed out in his ruling, most cases were dismissed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): “In the case of a court finding a violation of federal securities laws.”
“regardless of leadership changes, the SEC avoids whipping between disputes in ongoing litigation to protect the agency’s credibility,” said Corey Frayer, director of investor protection at the American Consumer Federation. “In awarding favors to cryptocurrency companies, SEC leaders chose to undermine the agency’s carefully established 90-year reputation.”
This is the second indicative ruling request from the SEC – essentially, what will the lower court do if the High Court returns the case to the lower court for a final ruling – Torres refused. In May, she I tried the first time. Quote jurisdiction and procedural deficiencies. Earlier this month, all parties tried again to submit A new extension request The court held that the “special circumstances” required amendment of Torres’ final judgment.
Torres is completely unconfident from the SEC and Ripple’s argument: “The court respects the freedom of the parties and can resolve their disputes friendly. The SEC is indeed, like any other law enforcement agency, the SEC has a discretion to change the course after the law enforcement action is initiated. Punishment to prevent the party from violating the law again is necessary.
If the parties “really want to end the lawsuit today,” Torres wrote, they have two other options: they can withdraw an ongoing appeal in this case, or they can file an appeal.
“Neither option involves requiring the court to perform its obligations under the law,” Torres said.
