-
U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres has denied Ripple Labs and the SEC’s joint motion to reduce penalties and lift restrictions in the ongoing XRP lawsuit, reaffirming the original court judgment.
-
The court emphasized the importance of procedural finality, rejecting attempts to modify the $125 million penalty and the permanent injunction on institutional XRP sales in the U.S.
-
According to COINOTAG, Judge Torres highlighted that the motion lacked the “exceptional circumstances” necessary under Rule 60(b) to alter a final judgment, underscoring the public interest in maintaining regulatory enforcement integrity.
Judge Torres denies Ripple and SEC’s joint motion to amend XRP lawsuit ruling, preserving penalties and sales restrictions amid ongoing regulatory scrutiny.
Judge Torres Upholds Final XRP Lawsuit Judgment, Reinforces Regulatory Enforcement
In a decisive ruling, U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres rejected the joint request by Ripple Labs and the SEC to amend the final judgment in the XRP lawsuit. The motion sought to dissolve a permanent injunction that restricts Ripple from selling XRP to institutional investors within the United States and to reduce the financial penalty from $125 million to $50 million. However, the court found that the parties failed to demonstrate the exceptional legal grounds required under Rule 60(b) to justify reopening or modifying a final judgment. This decision underscores the judiciary’s commitment to uphold regulatory enforcement actions and maintain procedural finality in complex securities litigation.
Legal Thresholds for Modifying Final Judgments in Securities Cases
The court’s order emphasized that final judgments carry significant weight and should only be altered under extraordinary circumstances that serve the public interest. Judge Torres noted that neither the settlement agreement between Ripple and the SEC nor changes in the SEC’s broader enforcement strategy constituted sufficient grounds for relief. The ruling cited precedent from the Supreme Court, reinforcing that judicial decisions must remain intact unless a clear and overriding justification exists. This legal framework ensures stability and predictability in enforcement actions, particularly in the evolving cryptocurrency regulatory landscape.
Implications for Ripple and the Broader Crypto Industry
This ruling maintains Ripple’s restrictions on institutional XRP sales in the U.S., reinforcing the court’s earlier finding that Ripple violated securities laws by offering XRP without proper registration. The decision also preserves the $125 million financial penalty, signaling the judiciary’s firm stance on compliance with securities regulations. For the broader crypto industry, this outcome highlights the ongoing regulatory challenges faced by digital asset issuers and the importance of adhering to established legal frameworks. Market participants should view this as a clear message that regulatory enforcement will remain stringent, particularly regarding token offerings classified as securities.
Ripple’s Settlement Argument and Court’s Response
Ripple and the SEC jointly argued that their settlement agreement and the SEC’s evolving enforcement approach warranted reconsideration of the court’s prior ruling. However, the court clarified that settlement agreements alone do not meet the high bar required to modify final judgments. The ruling pointed out that the cited cases involving the SEC’s dismissal of other crypto lawsuits did not involve comparable final judgments or civil penalties. Consequently, the court reaffirmed that the public interest in regulatory certainty outweighs the litigants’ desire to revisit settled matters.
Future Outlook and Regulatory Considerations
While this ruling closes the door on immediate relief for Ripple, it also sets a precedent for how courts may handle similar motions in cryptocurrency-related enforcement cases. The decision reinforces the principle that regulatory penalties and injunctions are not easily overturned, especially when grounded in thorough judicial findings. Crypto firms and investors should anticipate continued rigorous scrutiny from regulators and courts alike. Proactive compliance and transparent engagement with regulatory bodies will be essential strategies moving forward.
Conclusion
Judge Torres’s denial of the joint motion by Ripple and the SEC solidifies the finality of the XRP lawsuit’s outcome, preserving both the financial penalty and institutional sales restrictions. This ruling highlights the judiciary’s dedication to upholding securities laws within the crypto sector and affirms the high legal threshold required to alter final judgments. For Ripple and the broader industry, the decision serves as a critical reminder of the importance of regulatory compliance and the enduring impact of judicial enforcement actions.
