Jump to content

Legal Expert Explains How the SEC Has Been Abusing Howey Test in Its Case against Ripple and XRP


Recommended Posts

A lot of crypto and legal experts have aired their opinions on the ongoing lawsuit filed by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) against Ripple, the San Francisco-based cross-border payments firm, for allegedly selling XRP for relatively seven years as an unregistered security.

The latest legal expert to air his opinion over the case is J.W. Verret, an associate professor of law at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School and a member of the SEC's Investor Advisory Committee.

In a recent article published on Law360, Verret noted that the SEC has been abusing the Supreme Court’s Howey test by consistently failing to give regulatory clarity on digital assets and didn’t provide legal advice before deciding to file the lawsuit.

Stating what the current SEC chair is doing wrong, Verret wrote:

“Yet when Gensler is asked by members of Congress to provide more guidance about what he means, which tokens are securities and why they are deemed so, he will often respond that the SEC "doesn't give legal advice."

“That sort of gotcha game is inconsistent with the rule of law and the principles of a free society. It is worth paying close attention to the U.S. Supreme Court's Howey test, which determines whether an asset is an investment contract or security required to register with the SEC.”


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...