The joint filing by Ripple and the SEC has garnered attention from experts due to flaws in reasoning and lack of references to key legislative initiatives.
Flaws of the Filing
The filing failed to acknowledge prior judicial comments that pointed out questionable SEC actions. For instance, Judge Sarah Netburn previously criticized SEC lawyers for a lack of dedication to the law. Analysts expected the new filing to cite such commentary, but it did not.
Impact of Legislative Changes
The filing does not emphasize the potential impact of new legislative initiatives such as the Genius Act and Clarity Act, which could clarify regulatory aspects of the crypto market. Mentioning these changes could have strengthened the filing's arguments and demonstrated the need for a review of the court's initial decision.
Strategic Perspective and Judicial Standards
Analysts suggest that the filing may not meet the standard of persuasive legal reasoning required for a reversal from a sitting judge. However, observers note that the possibility of relief being granted still exists, especially given shifts in the SEC's enforcement approach under new leadership.
Despite flaws in the arguments presented, the potential for the court to grant relief still exists, and further developments may clarify the positions of both parties in the evolving regulatory landscape.
