SEC v. Ripple Never Should Have Happened, Reveals Securities Lawyer: 'XRP Was Never a Security' - U.Today

The SEC’s ongoing dispute with Ripple and the XRP token has resurfaced after a well-known U.S. securities attorney said the case should never have been brought As Round 2 of America’s Epstein-era scandals begins to blow up in Washington, crypto is getting dragged into the same conflagration.

Veteran securities lawyer James Murphy, known online as MetaLawMan, challenged the very foundation of the SEC’s case, stating that most legal professionals with crypto expertise never believed XRP qualified as a security in the first place. For Murphy, the enforcement action under Jay Clayton’s leadership was both unfounded and unjustified.

HOT Stories

Morning Crypto Report: Ripple’s Largest Stablecoin Mint Stuns XRP With $59 Million; 162,874,151,430 Shiba Inu (SHIB) Reactivated by Major Exchange After Three Weeks; Dogecoin (DOGE) Finally Breaks $0 ETF Streak

Ripple Participates in High-Stakes White House Summit

That sentence got the XRP community all riled up, still raw from years of legal battles over Ripple’s alleged unregistered sale of XRP tokens. The original lawsuit, filed just before Jay Clayton stepped down as SEC chairman, led to one of the most impactful legal disputes in crypto history. And it was not just about Ripple — it was a proxy war for the entire altcoin market.

What’s going on?

The new outrage is due to an old thread by tech investor Jason Calacanis, who once said that XRP is a “centrally controlled security” and warned that the SEC being too easy on it could cause “chaos” on the markets. The post was full of moral panic, and it also said that retail investors cannot buy XRP unless they pass a “sophisticated investor test.”

With public memory making a comeback among elite networks and questionable power plays, the return of SEC-era personalities linked to high-profile scandals is more than just an awkward situation; it may become a major firecracker.