The post XRP Lawsuit: New Mysterious ‘Decisive Evidence’ To Change Ripple Outcome? appeared first on Coinpedia Fintech News
The XRP lawsuit never “fails to entertain” and it just got interesting. A mysterious filing by Justin W. Keener with an emergency motion has resurfaced again.
Decisive Evidence Change The Outcome?
Keener says that he has “decisive evidence” which could change the outcome of the Ripple vs. SEC case in favor of Ripple. This unexpected move invited comments from experts like Bill Morgan and Marc Fagel.
“XRP Case Never Fails to Surprise”
Bill Morgan shared that he expected some kind of filing, especially with the 60-day deadline for a status update nearing on June 16. He didn’t expect a lengthy, emotional rant against the Howey Test and its court interpretations, especially about “investment contracts.” The rant also criticized the SEC’s actions over the past 90 years.
“This case never fails to entertain or end,” he said, which shows how unpredictable the lawsuit has become.
Marc Fagel also pointed out that this is the second time the same individual has submitted documents. The SEC even responded to the first one but questioned why the court hasn’t shut down the person’s PACER account yet, given the unauthorized filings.
Keener’s first attempt to submit his “decisive evidence” in the Ripple case was shut down back in April, but he’s now trying again. Keener was recently fined $10 million for illegally trading penny stocks without registering as a dealer.
Will This Impact The Lawsuit?
The XRP community is watching closely if this would have any impact on the lawsuit. Most expect the court to reject it again, but how the judge and SEC respond this time will show whether it has any real impact.
In a recent letter to SEC, Ripple said that fungible crypto assets like XRP aren’t securities in secondary sales. Citing legal expert Lewis Cohen and a 2023 court ruling, Ripple argued that these tokens don’t carry the legal traits of securities and requested the SEC to adopt clearer rules, noting that XRP itself was ruled not a security in public trading.
