SEC Pushes for Final Judgment in Crypto Case: Implications for Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH)

• The SEC has officially filed its redacted remedies reply brief in the ongoing case against Ripple.
• The commission argues that Ripple is likely to repeat the offense it is accused of, despite Ripple’s claim of not having committed any violation since 2020.
• The SEC concludes by urging the court to enter its Proposed Final Judgment as The Final Judgment.

The SEC has filed its redacted remedies reply brief against Ripple, arguing that the crypto firm is likely to repeat its alleged offense. The commission urges the court to enter its Proposed Final Judgment as The Final Judgment.

SEC Files Redacted Remedies Reply Brief Against Ripple

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has officially filed its redacted remedies reply brief and supporting exhibits in the ongoing case against Ripple. The filing is now publicly available after initial reports that the SEC made it under seal on the deadline day, May 6, 2024.

Ripple Likely to Repeat Offense, Says SEC

In the filing, the SEC urged the court to enter the requested injunctions, citing the parties’ agreement that the question is whether there is a reasonable likelihood that Ripple will repeat the offense. The commission also noted that Ripple does not dispute two key factors, one of which is being liable for a violation, and the other is that the offense happened over many years. According to the SEC, courts readily enter injunctions in such cases because they indicate a higher likelihood of repetition. The commission further highlighted that Ripple’s ongoing business places it in a position where “violations could be anticipated.”

Ripple’s Past Conduct and Future Intentions

The SEC did not dispute that Ripple may not have committed any violation since 2020. However, it noted that even if that is the case, it does not guarantee the non-anticipation of another violation by Ripple. According to the SEC, a defendant’s disclaimer of intent to violate the law in the future does not bar injunctive relief. The commission also highlighted Ripple’s argument that it voluntarily gave the SEC information about its business in 2013 without addressing the contravening steps it took in 2012.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the SEC maintains that Ripple’s past conduct was blameless, hence the firm’s litigation of the rejected argument. Citing many other reasons for its filing, the SEC concluded by pleading that the court enter its Proposed Final Judgment as The Final Judgment in the ongoing litigation. This development marks another significant chapter in the ongoing legal battle between the SEC and Ripple, with potential implications for the broader crypto industry.