08.08.2025 13:16
A surprising joint decision has brought an abrupt end to the protracted legal battle between Ripple and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) over XRP. Both parties have unexpectedly filed a motion to dismiss their respective appeals in the long-running case, effectively concluding nearly five years of litigation. This unexpected move, submitted under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b)(1), signals a significant turning point in the cryptocurrency regulatory landscape.
The joint motion to dismiss, filed with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, signifies a mutual agreement to cease further legal action. This resolution follows a July 2023 ruling by Judge Analisa Torres, which declared XRP itself not a security but found Ripple liable for violating securities laws concerning its institutional sales. While the SEC initially appealed this partial finding regarding programmatic sales, and Ripple challenged the institutional sales violation, both have now chosen to withdraw their appeals.
This coordinated dismissal eliminates the potential for further appellate court decisions that could have altered Judge Torres's original ruling. The agreement also stipulates that each party will bear their own legal costs, eliminating any further financial claims. Ripple’s Chief Legal Officer, Stuart Alderoty, publicly confirmed the decision, announcing that Ripple is now resuming normal business operations. The surprising resolution suggests an internal SEC vote favoring a settlement, indicating a shift in regulatory strategy.
The SEC initiated its lawsuit against Ripple on December 22, 2020, alleging illegal sales of unregistered securities. The subsequent five-year legal battle resulted in a $125 million fine imposed on Ripple and a permanent injunction against future institutional sales. This unexpected resolution, however, marks a significant conclusion to this landmark case, with implications for the broader cryptocurrency industry and the future of regulatory enforcement. The sudden agreement leaves many questions unanswered, but ultimately signals a decisive end to a high-profile legal dispute.
