Follow me on Twitter: @moonlamboio
SIGN UP FOR A FREE 7 DAY TRIALGET YOUR .CRYPTO DOMAIN AT UNSTOPPABLE DOMAINS
TRADE CRYPTO ON BINANCE HERE "LOW FEES"
DISCLAIMER: I am not a financial adviser. None of what I have communicated verbally or in writing here should be considered financial advice; it is not. Do your own research before investing in any digital asset, and understand that investing in any cryptocurrency is inherently risky. If you do, you need to be prepared to lose your entire investment.
Hello this is Matt on the moon Lambo Channel is xrp's regulatory Clarity at Risk is the xrp legal victory in the Secv Ripple case uh just going to be Pulled from us well a very well-known Journalist says yes that's exactly What's going to happen here's a headline From the Crypt basic SEC victory over Coinbase puts Ripple win at risk top Journalist uh there's a lot to be said Here I just I I will tell you this the Idea of most of this occurring is so Silly to me that I almost don't want to Make the effort but it is an interesting Topic so we're going to Wade through This but I will tell you at the outset Specifically as it pertains to xrp's Legal status no that is not changing I Could not be more confident about that But we'll get into it before going Further though do be clear I do not have A financial background of any kind I am Not offering Financial advice and you Definitely should not buy or sell Anything because of anything I say right I'm just an Enthusiast who enjoys making YouTube videos about crypto related Topics but just as a hobby and just for Fun now as a proper place uh table Setter here uh let's just review real Quick here uh here's a headline from Coin Edition this from August 21st of Last year USC officially acknowledges Xrp is non-security in new court files
So even the SEC highlighting this I Talked about it at the time here's a Post from August 18th last year I shared A screen grab from a court filing from The SEC to judge Torres and they wrote The F the relevant Portion is what I highlighted in red Right here and the SEC wrote The Following to judge Torres and the SEC Does not seek a pellet review of any Holding relating to the fact that the Underlying assets here are nothing but Computer codee with no inherent value Folks that is literally the SEC thrown In the towel on the on the the legal Status of xrp itself and so on August 18th I wrote The Following the SEC is Now blatantly stating they are not Challenging judge torres's decision that Xrp is not a security anyone that says The judge rof comment is a threat is Mistaken as even the SEC doesn't believe That and credit to attorney Morgan of Course for being the first to uncover That and I highlighted it and as far as The judge raikov thing I talked about it At the time it's a separate course in Which uh he disagreed with portions of What judge Torres had to say but not Specifically the legal status of xrp Just to be clear uh and so first and Foremost that that's real life that is What has happened I still don't believe For a moment there's a chance and hell
It's going to change even the SEC says They don't want that to Change so if there is some sort of Appeal if there is some sort of clawback Of whatever has happened here I still Don't think we lose that but let's get Into some of the specifics and I've got Perspective from a couple attorneys Including attorney Bill Morgan in here But pece reads as FSE Fox Business journalist Charles Gasperino speculates that the appellant Court could reverse Ripple's Victory Against SEC following the rejection of Judge torres's ruling by the judge in The coinbase case the recent Court Decision in the secv coinbase lawsuit Has increased the uncertainties Regarding the regulatory agency's legal Tussle against Ripple Labs recall that In an attempt to dismiss the SEC lawsuit Leading San Francisco based exchange Coinbase cited the Ripple verdict Specifically the decision on Programmatic sales of xrp on digital Exchanges I will pause to note here that Is not that is what so what I just Highlighted that not that to be super Clear The what what the SEC said they're not Going to appeal is is what xrp is the Legal status they said it's just it's Computer Code okay well there that's that's not
Up for debate anymore like that's that's The SEC says no so so that part's Already separate right there but anyway Piece continues for the uninitiated a Part of the verdict in the Ripple case Held that xrp sold on digital exchanges Does not qualify as investment contracts Because they were executed through blind Bid ask Transactions however on Wednesday March 27th US District Judge Katherine PK Fila Rejected this argument essentially Ciding with the SEC uh now folks we're going to have to Circle back around to that because as it Pertains I'll just tell you this before We go any further as it pertains Specifically to the request for uh for Dis missile in the coinbase case the Standard for that to be clear is very Different than the standard you'd expect Uh to be upheld in a in a motion for Summary judgment the conclusion of the Case these are very different Things anyway piece continues Interestingly the sec's recent victory Over coinbase at this early stage of the Lawsuit elicited a reaction from Charles Gasparino a senior correspondent at Fox Business citing Anonymous Securities Lawyers who he says have commented on The matter gasparino suggests F's Decision serves as a warning to xrp Holders claiming that a higher Court
Could reverse Ripple's Victory and again I'll say it one more time even the SEC Does not dispute the legal status of xrp That's their that's the final thing they Had to say on the Matter um now of course I acknowledge That doesn't mean that there there can't Be a further litigation it it doesn't Mean that you know there can't be appeal Requests further you know but as far as What that means for xrp no and in fact You may recall um last Summer judge judge attorney Jeremy Hogan Was talking about this and he and the um What I just showed you um or not what I Just showed you but the topic on what I Just showed you having to be with xrp Not being a security because on July 13th judge Tores did declare that um That's what's known as dicta and that's Not something that is possible to even Appeal so not only is it possible to Appeal the SEC says they won't seek a Pellet review of that and they agree It's just computer code that's what Matters to xrp Holders anything else in The case by the way that gets appealed I Mean not that it not that you know not That I want the SEC giving Ripple more Trouble you know not exactly siding with The SEC that wouldn't matter to the Everyday xrp holder that's all I'm Saying anyway peace continues gasparino Noted that while judge fer rejected
Ripple's decision she relied on Judge Jed raikov reasoning in the SEC case Against terraform Labs like Fila judge Raikov also rejected judge torres's Reasoning regarding Ripple's Programmatic sales of xrp before now Gasparino had continued to speculate That the appell at court would overturn Ripple's win against the SEC claiming Judge torres's decision suggest that xrp Is a security and non-security at the Same time yeah so that's obviously not Not the case and judge Tor has never Made the case that xrp is a security Sometimes and not other times I have Heard Charles gasparino argue that That's what judge Tores said but that's Just literally not true it comes to the Facts and circumstances surrounding Specific transactions that's it and then That's why on top of that she said Separate from that you know the asset Itself xrp and I'm paraphrasing here not A Security anyway peace continue since Judge Fila issued the coinbase decision There have been a series of debates Regarding whether the second circuit Would overturn the Ripple decision Expectedly top industry commentators Have dismissed Gasper's opinion on the Coin based decision and its significance To the Ripple lawsuit in particular seed Starter founder and attorney Jesse Hines
Characterized gas Perino's opinion as a Bad take Hines criticized gasperino Reasoning emphasizing that no real Lawyer would apply a ruling based on a Motion to dismiss like the one filed by Coinbase to a summary judgment decision Given in the Ripple case and I'll just Pause to note here and this is what I Was referencing a few minutes ago when It comes to a motion to dismiss if a Party is requesting that's that there be A dismissal like it's it's not that it's It's a it's a higher bar you know if you Want that to actually happen because and So a low bar for the SEC SEC basically So high bar for coinbase low bar to be Set for for the uh for the SEC because All that has to be shown is that from a Procedural perspective the complaint was Properly filed because the at the motion For dismissal you're not you're not Getting into necessarily the validity of All of the arguments that's not what That part of the trial is for it's like Does this even deserve to exist as a Court Proceeding so the judge here in coming To the conclusion that came to was just Saying that bar has been met which is Very different from than what you would Expect in a motion for Su or for uh Whatever the the actual summary judgment Is at the conclusion of the case very Different and Charles gasparino isn't
Recognizing that which I which I think Is is a mistake and that's what that's What he's pointing out here though so Again Hines criticized gasperino Reasoning emphasizing that no real Lawyer would would apply a ruling issued On a motion to dismiss like the one Filed by coinbase to a summary judgment Decision given in the Ripple case for Context the secv coinbase case is just Entering the discovery phase and the Judge's final decision on the case is Yet to come up interestingly Australian-based Pro xrp lawyer Bill Morgan also described gasparino Narrative as a bad take and so here you Can see U here here's what was written Uh to Charles gasperino by attorney Hines this is a really bad take LOL no Real lawyer will take the decision on What was essentially a motion to dismiss And apply it to a summary judgment Decision the haters need to come up with Better content attorney Morgan responded To that and said a really bad take from An unnamed Source whom Charles probably Misunderstood now gasparino did repost What I just shared with you that was Written by attorney Hines and said the Following a reminder to the xrp Community so far two federal judges Including the one considered the dean of Corporate law Judiciary raikov have Scoffed at arguments using judge
Torres's Ripple ruling as president Because the ruling itself is so Incoherent no one can guarantee the Ruling gets thrown out and xrp being Declared and unregistered Security um but the signs are there that Her legal analysis is Faulty again I just showed you the SEC Says no xrp is not I just showed it to You it's it's it's this is not something That we need to be debating here this is And this is not something the xrp Community needs to be fearful of I I I Just there's I don't I haven't seen a Good argument and then as far as uh Again the argument Charles gaspo here Says from from Judge Torres is Incoherent I read article that he wrote Explaining his why he believed that and I'm sure I covered it on my Channel at The time and it's because gasparino had A a misunderstanding of uh of what the Ruling actually Was it's it's not the case that she's Arguing extrap sometimes is and Sometimes isn't a security and that's What he believed was the case she is not Arguing that she never argued that she Was supplying specific factors relevant Only to this case to specific Transactions and in the case in the case Of the institutional stuff I mean she Just looked since the SEC didn't Technically do what they should have
Done and pointed out individual Transaction she just said all of these Are in one bucket now basically and she Ruled in that way but it was still based On those uh equivalent type of Transactions and so that's what he was Missing there and so no it's it's xrp is Fine you Know it's it's just as silly as thinking That the oranges in the ho case would be Securities like it's just that that that Concept would be incoherent frankly so I Guess I think he's still missing that Point here but no this is this is not Something that we need to worry About so attorney Morgan reposted that From Charles gasparino because he's not Buying this at all and he said to assist Your readers please point out the References in any decision of these two Judges and with judges in which they Scoff at arguments based on the decision In secv Ripple you are surely not Talking about two motions to dismiss Given the nature of such motions Compared to a summary judgment decision Did your attorney Source say her ruling Was incoherent and her legal analysis Was faulty well I'm going to go ahead And guess that the answer is no because That's language that Charles gasparino Has used himself in the past to describe Judge ts's rule he's called it Incoherent in the past and so I've not
Seen judges scoffing like what part Scoffing that that would be that would Be notable judges disagree sometimes Scoffing and on the legal status of xrp Itself I no And so attorney Morgan's asking Questions and we haven't gotten answers To this point I I don't suppose we Will so all that to say no this is not Something we need to worry about but It's been broadly discussed the last Couple days in the xrp community and so I thought ah I better just broach the Subject I feel like I feel obligated to Do so but that's why I wanted to start The video out by saying no I don't think This is an issue but let's talk about it That's pretty much it I'm not a Financial adviser you should not buy or Sell anything because of anything I say Right that would be a very very very bad Idea until next time to the Moon Lambo
