Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
US District Judge Ana Analisa Torres rejected a joint request of the US Securities and Stock Exchange Commission (SEC) and Ripple Labs Dissolve LOWER RIPPPL Earlier.
Decision, released 26. June firmly rejected the attempt to cancel the previous judgment bound to ripple violations on securities laws through its XRP Sale.
SEC and Ripple asked the court to remove a steady order that requires Ripple to follow the federal securities laws and reduce $ 125 million by more than 50%.
Judge Torres, however, rejected both applications in a single-line response and stated:
“The request is rejected.”
In particular, this means the second time it has rejected the attempts of both sides solve the long -term case through the negotiated settlement.
Why was the movement of the secrets of Sec rejected
In the court submission, the Court found that the parties had not met strict requirements for a change in the final judgment.
According to the Federal Code of Civil Procedure, it will turn into a final decision on extraordinary conditions. In this case, the court did not see any such justification.
Judge Torres reaffirmed that Ripple has already been found to violate the federal securities laws, with a proven probability of continuing misconduct.
She stressed that the original decision was to comply with the public interest and the discourse of future violation, and not just the penalty of the ripple.
The judge also rejected the idea that the final decision could be released simply because both parties agreed.
Referring to the precedent of the Supreme Court, it emphasized that the court decision, in particular the decision concerning federal law, is a matter of public interest and are not subject to a private agreement itself.
According to Judge Torres:
“However, the Supreme Court emphasized that the court’s judgment is” not only the property of private judges. It is the final judgment that belongs to “the legal community as a whole” and “should the state, unless the court concludes that the public interest would be delivered by reigning.” ”
Judge Torres further emphasized that the case exceeds Ripple and SEC.
According to her, the fine and the court order serve wider goals of regulatory objectives: protection of investors, maintaining market integrity and strengthening conformity in cryptal space.
The decision also stressed that Ripple’s actions were not less or unintentional, but marked by deliberate violations for a longer period of time.
It came to the conclusion that neither Ripple’s intention to cope, nor the willingness of SEC to compromise could not suppress the need for responsibility.
