Why Hasn't the Ripple XRP Litigation with the SEC Been Dropped Like Other Cases? Renowned Lawyer Puts Forward an Unusual Theory for the Reason!

A new theory has emerged regarding the long delay in the rejection of the lawsuit filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission against Ripple.

Prominent cryptocurrency attorney MetaLawMan suggests that Ripple's delay in reaching better settlement terms with the SEC may be due to itself.

In a recent statement, MetaLawMan suggested that Ripple may be pressuring to cancel part or all of Judge Analisa Torres's decision in SEC. While Torres's decision is seen as an important victory for XRP holders, it also included findings of violations of securities laws and a preliminary injunction containing 'bad boy' provisions; this could pose challenges for Ripple's future plans, including a potential initial public offering IPO or exempt securities offering.

MetaLawMan said, 'Torres' decision was unquestionably great for XRP holders, but it's not so great for Ripple with the identification of securities law violations and the imposition of 'bad boy' provisions.'

According to the lawyer's theory, the SEC might be willing to accept a simple agreement where both parties dismiss their objections and Ripple pays a $125 million fine. However, Ripple may be pushing for a more favorable outcome by trying to erase some legal precedents set by Torres's decision.

"All of this is purely speculative from my perspective. I could be wrong. This wouldn't be the first time," said MetaLawMan, adding that obtaining approval from a judge to overturn a previous decision is not a definite guarantee. While such agreements were more common in the past, federal judges have been increasingly resistant to this practice in recent years.