SEC vs. Ripple: The ‘amici curiae’ brawl came to life just because…
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) played its cards to revoke the amici curiae status granted to XRP holders. Different filings against it depicted the said narrative. Nevertheless, Defendant came back relentlessly to counter Plaintiff’s filings on several occasions.
Catch me if you can
Attorney John Deaton led a group of XRP holders by filing a motion to intervene in the case back in March 2021. Although their attempt got rejected by the court last October, they did manage to obtain amici status. Thereby aiding XRP holders incorporate “friends of the court” briefs.
And, now they might be after SEC as depicted by James K. Filan, a fellow famed attorney. The defendant had filed their response to SEC’s motion. Herein, the SEC requested the court to deny amici’s motion to participate in the lawsuit. And, to even deny attorney John Deaton’s involvement for ‘gross misconduct.’
— James K. Filan ???? 106k (beware of imposters) (@FilanLaw) July 25, 2022
Firstly, the filing targeted the SEC’s unlawful expansion of the Howey test as the token represented a “security per se”. This theory (by the SEC) has been an issue since the very beginning, as per Deaton. Ergo, the SEC itself is to blame because of its ‘unprecedented allegations.’
According to attorney Deaton, before he disclosed the SEC’s expert’s name, the parties in the lawsuit (Ripple and SEC) – had previously identified another SEC witness (Dr. Albert Metz) before it filed its motion. In this context, Deaton added,
“I never anticipated the issues with the second SEC expert, nor should I have been expected to, particularly given the release of the other expert’s identity by the parties.”
In addition, the said attorney blasted the SEC for taking the opposite stance regarding the Expert’s reports. Thus, asserting,
“The SEC’s diametrically opposed legal positions are consistent with Judge Netburn’s harsh but accurate observation that the SEC is adopting its litigation positions to further its desired goal, and not out of a faithful allegiance to the law.”
Overall, Plaintiff remains hellbent on revoking Amici’s rights in the lawsuit because the summary judgment filing date approached nearby.
Your choice led to
Indeed, the SEC aimed to remove Deaton from the case- there’s no denying it. Different enthusiasts asked the same question to the attorney on Twitter. For instance, consider this tweet.
Would love for the SEC to Reply to @JohnEDeaton1 and say:
"There's no reason for you to be in this case, sales of #XRP on the secondary market are not Securities."
— Mr. Intuitive – Trumors Only. (@BlackberryXRP) July 25, 2022
The key attorney figure responded:
“Had the SEC said this after I filed the writ of mandamus on 1 January, 2021, I wouldn’t be tweeting this and I wouldn’t be amicus counsel. I would have said ‘if you can prove Ripple sold a security in 2013 or yesterday, so be it.’ But the SEC chose to go with ALL XRP are illegal.”
As expected, attorney Deaton’s response to the SEC attracted a lot of reactions from the Ripple community. Attorney Jeremy Hogan commended Deaton’s response.
Att'y Deaton's response might be my FAVORITE brief in the Ripple case so far.
It defends his position in the case, defends his own actions, attacks the SEC, attacks the SEC expert, all in four pages.
AND, also happens to spill on Hinman and his "relation" to Ethereum.
— Jeremy Hogan (@attorneyjeremy1) July 25, 2022