SEC v. Ripple: Judge not happy with SEC’s arguments, Orders in-camera review

Rick Steves

“Let’s max out the conference call but give them zero to complain about”.

Judge Sarah Netburn has scheduled a telephone conference for today, 12:00 pm EST (New York time), to settle the privilege dispute that has been dragging on since April.

The SEC has argued its internal documents, which include the agency’s discussions over the nature of XRP and ETH, are protected by DPP (Deliberative Process Privilege).

That has been dismissed before by the Judge, two times already, as the Court considers those documents relevant to Ripple’s fair notice defense. The result of today’s hearing may well be a major win for Ripple.

The defendants have recently explained those documents will expose the agency’s contradictions in its decision-making throughout the years, which proves the SEC didn’t provide fair notice that XRP could be considered a security.

William Hinman’s deposition has already provided a general feel that regulatory clarity is something lacking in the SEC’s communications. Jeremy Hogan, an attorney friendly with the XRP community, has pointed out two bombshells in that deposition that could strengthen the fair notice defense.

The SEC yesterday filed a motion to compel Ripple to hand over recordings of specific meetings. “Ripple never informed the SEC that Ripple routinely recorded staff meetings until a key former Ripple employee testified to that in her deposition earlier this month”, said the plaintiff.

You might want to read this: 

SEC files motion to compel Ripple to hand over “hidden” recordings 

SEC v. Ripple: XRP Holders uncover video bombshell to throw against SEC

Did you trade XRP: Ripple puts SEC employees on the spot

Mark Cuban blasts SEC Chair on crypto clarity as Ripple lawsuit lingers

SEC appoints CFA’s Director of Investor Protection while under fire for Ripple lawsuit on XRP

XRP lawsuit: Ripple goes for the jugular with SEC’s contradictions

11:00 pm – XRP Holders vow to “max out conference call”

Judge Netburn has published the dial-in for tomorrow’s discovery hearing (8/31) at 12:00pm EST (16:00 UTC):

USA: (844) 867-6163

INTL: (409) 207-6969

Access Code: 9453921#

Unauthorized recordings will be investigated and anyone found to engage in such behaviors may be subject to criminal sanctions, Judge Sarah Netburn said in a letter.

John Deaton, lawyer for the nearly 20,000 XRP Holders that filed a motion to intervene in the SEC v. Ripple lawsuit, has called his following to max out the conference call. The hearing is limited to 4,000 listeners.

The SEC has already complained about the enormous popularity of these hearings: “Given the high level of interest in this litigation, participation by thousands of investors has already proven “incredibly disruptive” to Judge Netburn’s court conferences.”

“Let’s max out the conference call but give them zero to complain about”, John Deaton said.

SEC v. Ripple: Judge aware of XRP Army’s investigative work – Atty Hogan

12:30 pm – Session has started, Phone lines in full capacity

XRP Holders have kept their promise and maxed out the conference call as requested by attorney John Deaton, proving how critical the lawsuit is for the digital asset space.

The Judge has reminded the audience that video and audio recordings or broadcasts are strictly prohibited and subject to criminal sanctions.

Judge Sarah Netburn first asked about the SEC’s aiding and abetting claim regarding the complaint against the individual defendants, if Brad Garlinghouse think it relies on objective or subjective foreknowledge that XRP was a security in 2013, to which counsel Matt Solomon replied that it had to be obvious to reasonable people.

If the status of XRP was not obvious to the SEC until filing the lawsuit in December 2020, it could not have been obvious to Mr. Garlinghouse, Ripple’s counsel stated.

Matt Solomon then mentioned the SEC’s use of the deliberative privilege process (DPP) argument to keep its internal documents from being handed over to the defendants. Mr. Solomon argued that the plaintiff went grossly overboard in regard to DPP and should be compelled to hand over those documents as requested by Ripple.

Judge not happy with SEC’s subjective interpretation

Then, the Judge moved to attorney Jorge Tenreiro, the SEC’s counsel, and asked his view of the “reckless standard” for the aiding and abetting claim made by the plaintiff.

Mr. Tenreiro first attacked Ripple’s analysis and stated that specific, simple foreknowledge alone is all that counts. “But was Mr. Garlinghouse’s action objectively reasonable?”, the Judge asked.

The SEC answered with a subjective argument – “He could sit before a jury and say he did or didn’t know” – to which the Judge interrupted “But that’s subjective!”.

The Judge asked again and Mr. Tenreiro repeated himself, i.e., not offering an objective interpretation of Garlinghouse’s alleged aiding and abetting of an unregistered securities offering.

Then, the SEC counsel complained that Ripple wants to “collapse everything” into “digital asset law” and look at “everything internally” and “swing the door open” which would be “very damaging”.

Judge wants to see “privileged” documents with her own eyes

Judge Netburn asked why the court can’t look at that and if it needs to determine dates on what was deliberation or is it an ongoing thing.

Mr. Tenreiro explained there is “pre-decisional” and a “post-decisional” process and there are plenty of examples in the privilege logs to argue different, concurrent deliberative processes.

“How am I supposed to know all that?”, the Judge interrupted as she decided she would conduct an in camera review of the SEC documents.

Mr. Tenreiro advised the Judge to exercise caution, while stating it could be “very prejudicial”. Judge Netburn reminded the SEC the defendants “won’t be reviewing them” (the internal documents) during the in camera review.

The Judge will thus proceed with reviewing the SEC’s internal documents on her own to then rule on the deliberative process privilege claim by the SEC. The ruling should be made after September 28.

Read this next

Digital Assets

Bybit exits UK market ahead of regulatory changes

Bybit is suspending its cryptocurrency services for users in the United Kingdom due to impending regulations from the country’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

Digital Assets

Binance argues SEC trampled authority set by Congress

Binance, Binance.US, and Changpeng Zhao have jointly filed to dismiss a lawsuit brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in June.

Uncategorized

Oscar Asly replaces Rasha Gad as CEO of M4Markets Dubai

Seychelles-regulated brokerage firm M4Markets has secured a license from the Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA) after it has already incorporated its new subsidiary in the Dubai International Financial Center (DIFC).

Retail FX

Capital Index UK reports mitigated loss despite revenue drop

FCA-regulated brokerage firm Capital Index (UK) Limited has released its annual financial report for the year 2022.

Digital Assets

Mike Novogratz’s Galaxy Digital expands in Europe

Galaxy Digital, the New York-based cryptocurrency financial services company founded by Mike Novogratz, is expanding its presence in Europe by appointing Leon Marshall as its first European CEO.

Metaverse Gaming NFT

Turingum Partners with MarketAcross to Drive Web3 Adoption in Global and Japanese Markets

Global blockchain PR leader MarketAcross joins forces with Japanese Web3 specialist Turingum to mutually expand its market reach, aiming to fortify Turingum’s worldwide footprint and MarketAcross’s presence in the lucrative Japanese blockchain landscape.

Digital Assets

Binance to delist all stablecoins in Europe next year

During a public hearing with the European Banking Authority (EBA), an executive from Binance said that the exchange could ultimately delist stablecoins from its European platforms by June 30, 2024.

Industry News

“Unconscionable conduct”: ASIC fines National Australia Bank $2.1m for overcharging customers

NAB faces a $2.1 million penalty for unconscionable conduct, as the Federal Court rules the bank knowingly overcharged customers, and took over two years to rectify the situation.

<