Quick overview

Live XRP/USD Chart

---

Securities lawyer Marc Fagel offered an alternative perspective. He states that rumors of settlement negotiations are unfounded and that the delay is likely due to the complexity of internal processes. Fagel clarified that the SEC’s internal procedures, such as creating action memos, are responsible for the delay, not secret negotiations.

 

The ongoing legal battle between Ripple and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has attracted significant attention.  Ripple argued that the SEC’s lawsuit is an abuse of its regulatory power, insisting that XRP is a currency rather than a security.

Fagel identified the main causes of the delay as bureaucratic steps like scheduling commissioner votes, internal reviews, and drafting action memos. “Nobody is holding up the case,” he said, dismissing the idea that the judge or the SEC is deliberately delaying proceedings. The most recent analysis follows a closed-door meeting on July 17 that did not yield the expected breakthrough.

Some XRP holders believed a resolution was near after Ripple dismissed its appeal. However, Fagel responded that it can take weeks for the SEC to schedule enforcement votes.

Fagel added that the SEC’s weekly closed-door meetings follow a set schedule and should not be seen as case-specific. Although Ripple has already paid a $125 million penalty in cash rather than XRP, Fagel emphasized that this does not mean the case is over, and the outcome depends on the appeals process.  The wait could extend for several more weeks if his assessment proves correct.

Ripple and the SEC have been presenting their cases and supporting documents in court for over a year. While the outcome remains uncertain, the cryptocurrency market has already experienced notable effects.

The legal dispute has also raised broader questions about US cryptocurrency regulation. Some interpret the SEC’s action against Ripple as an attempt to exert control over the sector, which has largely operated outside traditional regulatory frameworks. Others argue that the SEC needs to act to protect investors from dishonest and fraudulent practices.