Marc Fagel notes XRP lawsuit persists as SEC must vote to drop appeal, despite Ripple ending its cross-appeal; injunction stays.
Although Ripple has withdrawn its cross-appeal against the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the XRP lawsuit, which began in December 2020, remains unresolved. While the XRP community celebrates what some believed was a final settlement, former SEC lawyer Marc Fagel has clarified that the case is not fully concluded until the SEC formally drops its appeal.
Why the XRP Lawsuit Persists
Marc Fagel has challenged the widespread assumption that the Ripple vs. SEC lawsuit has ended, emphasizing that the case remains active until the SEC votes to abandon its appeal.
In a post on X, Fagel expressed optimism that the SEC will ultimately withdraw its appeal, paving the way for a final resolution. However, he noted uncertainty about whether the SEC’s prior vote to authorize a settlement also included approval to drop the appeal.
This ambiguity has sparked debate within the XRP community.
XRP lawyer Bill Morgan questioned Fagel on X, asking whether a new SEC vote is necessary because the conditions of the settlement agreement were not met. Fagel explained that approving a settlement and dropping an appeal are distinct actions, adding that it would be unusual for the SEC to have voted on both simultaneously. He remarked,
They voted to authorize a settlement agreement; simply dropping the case is a different action. That said, we don’t know what exactly they voted on—it would be unusual for them to have simultaneously voted to approve both options, but nothing about this is normal.
Fagel’s comments have tempered the XRP community’s celebrations, leading some, including Morgan, to revise earlier claims. Morgan, who initially declared the lawsuit “finally, finally, OVER,” later qualified his statement, citing Fagel’s perspective on the ongoing nature of the case.
Debate Over the Ripple-SEC Settlement
While many in the XRP community have welcomed the reported settlement, some critics argue it implies Ripple admitted fault. Morgan refuted this, stating that settlements typically do not involve admitting liability. He emphasized,
Settlement is not an admission of fault. Most settlement agreements are made without admission of liability. Ripple has never admitted that its sales to institutions were investment contracts.
Morgan also corrected the notion that Ripple’s primary victory was the ruling that XRP is not a security in retail contexts. Instead, he highlighted that the key win was Judge Analisa Torres’ determination that XRP is not a security, a finding based on the court’s broader reasoning.
Morgan argued that this ruling positions XRP as akin to a commodity, regardless of how it is sold or offered, a distinction that does not depend on retail sales or secondary market transactions. He previously noted that Judge Torres’ ruling on the joint motion would not alter XRP’s legal status.
The lawsuit’s developments, including the SEC’s agreement to reduce the penalty from $125 million to $50 million, reflect a shift toward resolution, though the appeal’s status keeps the case open.
Ripple’s CEO, Brad Garlinghouse, announced on March 19, 2025, that the SEC would abandon its appeal, signaling progress toward ending the litigation. However, as of June 2025, the case remains paused, with the SEC directed to provide a status update by mid-June, indicating that a final resolution is still pending.
