Ripple v. SEC: Law Veteran Thinks Settlement Is Unlikely, Here’s Why

In a recent Twitter exchange, members of the XRP community sought insights from Marc Fagel, a former lawyer and SEC functionary, regarding the ongoing case between Ripple and the SEC. In particular, one of the community members questioned whether the watchdog would risk a trial against Ripple or opt for serious settlement talks, considering the potential ramifications for their broader crypto-related lawsuits against Binance and Coinbase.

Fagel responded by stating that while a settlement would not establish legal precedent, it could potentially have significant implications. However, he expressed doubts about the likelihood of a settlement, noting that if one were to occur, it would probably have happened already. Fagel further mentioned that the impact of an injunction on future XRP sales remains a contentious issue.

Correct. A settlement wouldn’t be legal precedent. But if there were a settlement to be had, it seems like it would’ve happened already (not that eve-of-trial settlements are unusual). Presumably the impact of an injunction on future XRP sales is a sticking point.

— Marc Fagel (@Marc_Fagel) June 17, 2023

Fagel’s stance echoes his prior statements reported by U.Today, wherein he predicted an imminent ruling in the SEC’s case against Ripple. He further noted that a recent unsealing order by Judge Torres implied that the court had already determined its forthcoming ruling.

When asked if Judge Torres’ decision to unseal certain documents suggested an intention to avoid a trial, Fagel refrained from making speculative assumptions. However, he pointed out that the unsealing of materials, such as the speech materials, which would typically emerge during a trial rather than in summary judgment, implies that some aspects of the case are likely to proceed to trial.