Ripple vs SEC: XRP Holder’s Lawyer Bashes SEC’s Position

• Ripple is being sued by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) with the dispute revolving around whether XRP should be construed as an investment contract.
• John Deaton, a lawyer representing thousands of XRP holders, has recently reviewed and agreed on a Twitter thread that criticizes the position of the SEC.
• A patent litigator took it to Twitter to lay down their thoughts on the Ripple v. SEC case, claiming that it’s really not that complicated and raises only two real questions.

Ripple v. SEC Lawsuit

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is currently embroiled in a lawsuit against Ripple Labs Inc., with the dispute revolving around whether XRP should be deemed as an “investment contract” and therefore classified as a security. Thousands of XRP holders are represented by lawyer John Deaton who recently concurred to a Twitter thread criticising the stance taken by the SEC in this case. Additionally, patent litigator Sandy Seth also shared their opinion on this matter via Twitter – claiming that despite its complexity, Ripple’s case only raises two real questions about this decision.

John Deaton’s Criticism

Lawyer John Deaton is standing up for thousands of XRP holders who have been affected by the ongoing legal battle between Ripple Labs Inc. and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Recently, he concurred to a Twitter thread which criticises the position taken by the SEC in this case – claiming that crypto lawyers can get paid a lot of money if they make cases more complicated than they actually are – something which he believes isn’t good public policy.

Sandy Seth’s Opinion

Patent litigator Sandy Seth spoke out regarding this law suit via his Twitter account – asserting that although complex, Ripple’s case only raises two real questions about whether or not XRP should be considered an „investment contract“. He further goes on to explain why these issues aren’t actually as complicated as they seem, encouraging people to look beyond what lawyers may claim in order to better understand how such matters work from a legal standpoint.

Howey Test

One of these two questions raised by both Deaton and Seth pertains to something known as „the Howey Test“, which utilizes four criteria in order to determine whether or not an instrument constitutes an „investment contract“ under US securities law: 1) Investment of money 2) In common enterprise 3) With expectation of profits 4) From third-party efforts The application of this test will ultimately decide if XRP should be classified as security or not based upon its characteristics within each individual criterion outlined above.


It remains unclear when a ruling for or against either party will come through but one thing is certain – there are many professionals speaking up for both sides of this argument with strong opinions about what they believe should happen next given all available evidence presented thus far. What do you think? Should XRP be considered an investment contract? Let us know your thoughts in our comments section below!