XRP Army affidavits were a significant evidentiary factor in Ripple’s partial win against the SEC, with thousands of supporter statements cited by Judge Analisa Torres to distinguish public-exchange sales from institutional offerings of XRP.
-
XRP Army affidavits were filed en masse and cited in court decisions
-
Judge Analisa Torres ruled public-exchange XRP sales are not securities while institutional sales were treated differently
-
Over 2,000 exhibits and affidavits were recorded, per attorney John Deaton and court filings
XRP Army affidavits influenced Ripple v. SEC rulings; read the court-cited evidence and expert commentary. Learn what it means for XRP holders.
What role did the XRP Army affidavits play in Ripple’s SEC case?
The XRP Army affidavits provided real-user evidence that the court used to assess how XRP functioned in public transactions. Judge Analisa Torres cited holder statements when distinguishing between institutional offers and routine retail trading on public exchanges.
How many affidavits and exhibits were submitted, and who documented them?
Attorney John Deaton and community members reported that thousands of affidavits and more than 2,000 exhibits were filed in the case. These documents included personal declarations about using XRP to buy goods and services and statements that some users were unaware of Ripple as a corporate actor.
Why did affidavits matter to the judge’s decision?
Affidavits supply the court with factual context about market behavior. In the October 2023 split ruling, the judge used holder affidavits to support the finding that typical retail purchases on public exchanges did not meet the Howey test for securities.
When did the case reach its decisive phase?
The case began in 2020 and produced a pivotal split ruling in October 2023. Appeals followed, and both Ripple and the SEC dropped their appeals in August 2025, effectively concluding the litigation phase.
How did key players describe the impact of the XRP Army?
John Deaton, a lawyer and XRP advocate, publicly asserted that the XRP Army “made a difference” and pointed to the quantity of exhibits as proof. Pseudonymous community members echoed that personal affidavits demonstrated ordinary consumer use of XRP.
What types of statements did supporters provide?
Supporter affidavits described being paid in XRP, spending XRP on bills and goods, and using exchanges without awareness of Ripple. These factual accounts aimed to show retail usage patterns distinct from investment contracts sold by an issuer.
| Aspect | Institutional Sales | Public-Exchange Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Judge’s finding | Violated securities laws | Not securities |
| Evidence cited | Contracts, direct offers | Holder affidavits, market behavior |
| Impact on Ripple | Liability exposure | Regulatory relief for retail trading |
Frequently Asked Questions
Did the XRP Army directly change the legal outcome?
Judge Torres cited holder affidavits as part of the factual record supporting the split ruling. While legal decisions rest on multiple factors, the affidavits contributed contextual evidence distinguishing retail trading from institutional offers.
Can affidavits alone decide a securities case?
Affidavits provide factual context but do not replace legal analysis. Courts consider affidavits alongside contracts, witness testimony, and statutory law when applying securities tests like Howey.
Key Takeaways
- Affidavits mattered: Thousands of supporter statements were filed and cited in the ruling.
- Split ruling nuance: Public-exchange sales were ruled not securities; institutional sales were treated differently.
- Community impact: The XRP Army mobilized documentation that illustrated consumer use of XRP.
Conclusion
The XRP Army affidavits formed part of the evidentiary backdrop that helped shape the Ripple v. SEC outcome, supporting the court’s distinction between retail and institutional XRP transactions. Legal experts, community leaders, and court filings all point to a multifaceted resolution; COINOTAG will continue monitoring developments and official filings.
Published by COINOTAG — Updated: 2025-09-04. Sources cited as plain text: court filings, statements by attorney John Deaton, Judge Analisa Torres ruling, community member affidavits, reporting by COINOTAG (plain text reference).
