Ripple’s chief legal officer confirmed that XRP’s non-security classification remains unaffected, reaffirming regulatory clarity despite a recent court setback that halted the proposed settlement with the SEC.
Ripple’s Legal Head Calms Fears After Court Blocks SEC XRP Deal
Ripple’s chief legal officer, Stuart Alderoty, addressed the crypto community on Thursday after a court ruling rejected a joint motion by Ripple Labs and the U.S. authorities. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to modify a prior judgment in their continuing legal dispute over XRP. It was clarified by Alderoty, via a post on the social media platform X, that the court’s decision does not reverse Ripple’s significant legal wins, stating:
Nothing in today’s order changes Ripple’s wins (i.e. XRP is not a security, etc).
Ripple’s chief legal officer clarified the context of the ruling, emphasizing that it addresses procedural matters rather than substantive ones related to XRP. Specifically, he noted that the decision concerns the dismissal of Ripple’s cross-appeal. In his words, “This pertains to procedural concerns involving the dismissal of Ripple’s cross-appeal,” reinforcing that no judgment was made on the core issues surrounding XRP itself.
Judge Analisa Torres of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York denied a joint motion by Ripple and the SEC that sought to dissolve an injunction and reduce a $125 million penalty to $50 million. The judge ruled that the motion was “procedurally improper,” explaining that the filer should have submitted it under Rule 60. This rule governs relief from final judgments and requires evidence of “exceptional circumstances.” As the case moves forward, the injunction against Ripple and the full penalty remain in effect.
Alderoty emphasized that Ripple and the SEC remain aligned in seeking a resolution regarding the sale of XRP, stating:
Ripple and the SEC are fully in agreement to resolve this case and will revisit this issue with the court, together.
The parties reached a provisional agreement on May 8 to resolve the issue by lowering the penalty and removing the injunction. Although Judge Torres’ recent decision has paused that plan, a revised and properly submitted motion could still move forward.
