In the long legal battle between Ripple and the American Securities and Exchange commission (Sec), judge Analisa Torres made a new decision – and he spoke the world of cryptography.
Judge Torres refused a joint request from Ripple and the SEC for what is called an “indicative decision”. In simple terms, she told them that if the case was back under her control, she still does not settle on their request because it was not properly filed.
The rumors swirl: XRP lacks legal clarity?
Just after that, rumors began to spread quickly on social networks, saying that XRP still has no legal clarity because no court has officially classified it – as the way Bitcoin was called a product.
Bitcoin supporters argue that since XRP was not “classified” like Bitcoin, this means that XRP remains in the legal limbo. But the pro-XRP avocado, Bill Morgan, intervened to clean the air.
Bill Morgan: The argument “without legal clarity” makes no sense
Bill Morgan called this “illogical nonsense” argument. He explained that the simple fact of an asset of crypto was not officially labeled by a court or a government does not mean that it lacks legal clarity.
Morgan stressed that even in other countries like Australia, Bitcoin was only judged recently as a “property” by a superior court. This did not mean that it was not clear before – he was simply not officially labeled.
He added that in the United States, the debate between raw materials and securities is mainly important because the SEC has aggressively targeted cryptocurrencies. If an asset is classified as a commodity, it avoids the regulation of the dry, which is why so many people in the cryptographic space care about this problem.
XRP already has a legal clarity where it counts
Morgan reminded the community that Judge Torres has already judged that XRP himself was not security. This decision, he said, is a form of legal clarity because it settles one of the biggest questions on the status of XRP.
The courts, said Morgan, don’t just classify things for good. They make decisions on specific legal issues presented to them. And in this case, the question was whether the sales of Ripple XRP were sales of illegal titles – and not if XRP is a commodity, a currency or something else.
Final take: what XRP is … and is not
The expert believes that if the Torres judge was to classify XRP, the reasoning behind his decision suggests that she could have looked at a product. But more importantly, we have already clarified that XRP is not security, and it is a major victory.
He also noted that in legal systems around the world, many things have legal clarity without being officially labeled by law. The emphasis should be put on what something is not – and for XRP, it is not security. This alone provides significant legal certainty for the moment.
