Ripple’s Legal Development Creates a Buzz: CEO Clarifies XRP’s Status
The post Ripple’s Legal Development Creates a Buzz: CEO Clarifies XRP’s Status appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com.
Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse shares an X post, shedding light on Judge Phyllis Hamilton’s recent ruling. Garlinghouse asserts that the judge’s ruling hasn’t changed the fact that XRP is not a security. In his recent post, the CEO reiterates his optimistic approach to the status of Ripple’s XRP. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse countered the most recent court ruling which questioned XRP’s status as a non-security, reaffirming his stance and clarifying the implications for the ongoing lawsuit. As many have noticed – and some have already pointed out – there have been numerous misleading and some factually inaccurate headlines describing the decision made by a California judge yesterday in the class action lawsuit about XRP. (I’m happy to see some correcting them – I… — Brad Garlinghouse (@bgarlinghouse) June 21, 2024 In a recent development in the Ripple lawsuit, Judge Hamilton allowed the charge of “misleading statements” against Garlinghouse to proceed. However, Garlinghouse hailed the ruling as a “big win,” as the judge dismissed four class action claims against him. The judge, during the judgment, had expressed reservations about Judge Analisa Torres’ previous ruling that XRP is not a security. Judge Hamilton stated, “The court declines to find as a matter of law that a reasonable investor would have derived any expectation of profit from general cryptocurrency market trends, as opposed to Ripple’s efforts to facilitate XRP’s use in cross-border payments, among other things.” While the ruling sparked debate in the community, with “numerous misleading and some factually inaccurate headlines,” Garlinghouse stated: “To be absolutely clear, this is a big win – all class action claims in the suit were DISMISSED, and absolutely nothing in the decision negates or changes the fact that XRP is, in and of itself, not a security (per the NY Court decision). The CA ruling dismissed…
Filed under: News - @ June 22, 2024 10:10 am