XRP Lawyer on Key Difference Between Ripple and Terra in Battle With SEC

In a recent courtroom showdown, Judge Rakoff delivered a crucial verdict favoring the SEC in its case against Terraform Labs. The ruling deemed Terraform Labs’ digital assets, including the prominent UST, as unregistered securities, a significant win for the SEC. Despite this, the decision has left the regulatory landscape for digital assets largely unchanged.

Stuart Alderoty, chief legal officer at Ripple, took to X to weigh in on the contrasting narratives surrounding crypto rulings. Alderoty dismissed comparisons, emphasizing the substantial nature of Ripple’s legal victory. He likened it to a small crack compromising a battleship’s structural integrity, ultimately leading to its demise.

Attorney John Deaton, representing XRP holders, provided a distinctive perspective on the legal disparities between the Terra and Ripple cases. Deaton asserted that the Howey analysis, crucial in these matters, is inherently fact-intensive. Drawing an analogy, he painted the Terra case as a severe accident caused by a reckless driver, highlighting the government’s success in holding Terra responsible.

A Howey analysis is a fact intensive exercise. From the moment Judge Rakoff denied Terra’s Motion to Dismiss, I’ve said comparing the two crypto cases is like comparing two auto accident cases, with completely different facts. But since people want to compare, let’s compare:… https://t.co/3FpmyN7sdj

— John E Deaton (@JohnEDeaton1) December 30, 2023

Contrastingly, the Ripple case, according to Deaton, involved a comparatively minor infraction — akin to a speeding ticket for an expired registration. Despite the fine, Ripple emerged victorious on the key aspect of causing the accident.

Deaton pointed out that, unlike Terra, Ripple was cleared of any damages related to the incident, presenting a pivotal distinction between the two legal battles.

Source