XRP Investors Cry Foul Over SEC’s Ethereum Favoritism

The XRP community is crying foul over the SEC’s perceived favoritism towards Ethereum, sparking outrage and calls for legal action.

The controversy stems from the SEC’s recent decision to drop its lawsuit questioning Ethereum’s security status, shortly after approving a spot Ethereum ETF. This move has drawn stark comparisons to Ripple’s ongoing legal battles with the SEC, fueling accusations of regulatory inconsistency.

Ethereum’s second free pass from the SEC almost exactly 6 years after the Hinman free speech.

Ethereum’s and Ripple’s different treatment will forever show how arbitrary the SEC has been in crypto. https://t.co/Coxf6czO9r pic.twitter.com/WNcacVYhNE

— bill morgan (@Belisarius2020) June 19, 2024

Bill Morgan, a prominent figure within the XRP community, has been particularly vocal about the perceived disparity. He argues that the SEC’s decision to give Ethereum a “second pass” nearly six years after the influential Hinman speech—which clarified Ethereum’s status as not a security—is emblematic of the SEC’s inconsistent regulatory approach.

This situation has sparked outrage among XRP supporters, with pseudonymous analyst @digitalassetbuy calling the SEC’s actions “criminal” and advocating for Ripple executives Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsen to sue the SEC, dubbing the controversy “ETHGATE.”

The analyst highlighted that Ripple has spent over $100 million on regulatory issues with the SEC over the past three years, a financial burden not shouldered by Ethereum.

Just to be clear this is great for crypto overall but that doesn’t mean the SEC and those involved in ETHGATE still shouldn’t get what’s coming to them. Corruption can’t be allowed to slide. https://t.co/gJA4Q7m8Zb

— Digital Asset Investor (@digitalassetbuy) June 19, 2024

Yet another analyst questioned why the SEC needed to write a letter to ConsenSys if Ethereum is truly decentralized. Morgan responded:

“The decentralization factor is a (peculiarly American) made up factor. No one has explained how or why it intrinsically makes a token more or less a security or commodity. It is a concept employed to try and avoid falling under the SEC’s reach by arguing a token can magically morph from a security to a commodity.”

In closing it is worth noting that the ongoing debate over the SEC’s regulatory approach and the perceived disparities in its treatment of different cryptocurrencies continue to fuel discussions within the crypto community.

Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.

Source