The lawsuit brought against Ripple by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has raged on for the last five years. While the last year has brought very good news for supporters of XRP, it has yet to be dismissed completely, which has further dampened morale. But while it seems that there is something major holding the lawsuit from being concluded, a former SEC lawyer has come forth to verify that what is actually holding back the conclusion.
No Pending Decisions In Ripple Vs. SEC Lawsuit
After one XRP community member known as ToniTheRippler posted on X (formerly Twitter) about the possibility of Ripple’s banking license being approved, a debate was quickly sparked in the comments over when this could happen. Community members were mainly worried about the ongoing Ripple Vs. SEC lawsuit and how this could impact and probably delay the approval of the banking license.
One community member responded that things are expected to move fast now that there is a pro-crypto SEC. However, another user commented that if it were so, they would have dropped the Ripple case already. A third user then explained that the fault does not lie with the SEC, but rather with the judge, Judge Analisa Torres, who has ordered that both parties follow due process in their bid to drop the case.
Given the multiple angles being thrown around, former SEC lawyer Marc Fagel chimed in to clear the air and reveal what was really holding up the case. Since both the SEC and Ripple have agreed to drop the case, Fagel revealed that neither of them was to blame for the case not being dropped yet. Rather, both parties have to follow the standard procedure to do so, and the problem was that this procedure typically takes between 1 and 2 months before it is completed.
Explaining further, Fagel, responding to the same user, explained that both parties had actually already resubmitted their filings to drop the case. But the court decided that they had failed to meet the burden required. Thus, Judge Analissa Torres had refused to modify the order against Ripple.
This means that presently, there is actually nothing left to be deliberated on by the court, as both parties no longer have any pending judgments. Instead, they now have to work to actually meet the requirements to completely dismiss the appeals that were initially filed by both parties, which Fagel said they would do shortly.
As for when the Ripple vs. SEC lawsuit would be completely done, going by the timeline provided by Fagel, it would mean that the lawsuit should be concluded by late-August, barring any other developments.
