Key Takeaways
On May 8, 2025, Ripple and the SEC reached a final $50 million settlement, closing a legal battle that began in 2020.
The deal followed months of appeals and tense negotiations.
Ripple secured a reduced penalty, ending the case on favorable terms and marking a turning point for the company.
In response, the XRP price soared.
The lawsuit between Ripple Labs and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was a legal dispute and a pivotal moment for the cryptocurrency industry.
This article outlines a timeline of the Ripple–SEC case, examining its origins, major developments, and the broader implications for the future of cryptocurrency.
Here is a summary of the key events in the ongoing legal battle between Ripple and the SEC:
Year | Event | Details |
2020 | SEC Files Lawsuit Against Ripple Labs | SEC accuses Ripple of selling unregistered XRP securities |
2021-2023 | Discovery Phase & Hinman Emails | Disputes over SEC’s 2018 Ether classification |
2023 | Judge Torres’ Ruling on XRP | Programmatic XRP sales ruled non-securities; institutional sales are securities |
2024 | Remedies Phase & XRP Judgment | Ripple fined $125M; SEC’s disgorgement request denied |
2024 | Appeals Process Begins | Both Ripple and SEC file appeals |
2022-2024 | Legal Briefs & Amicus Briefs | Industry groups file briefs in support of Ripple |
Jan 2025 | SEC Files Latest Appeal | SEC seeks to overturn the 2023 ruling on XRP; Ripple remains optimistic |
May 2025 | Final Settlement Reached | Ripple and the SEC settled the case with a $50 million payment. Both parties dropped their appeals, officially ending the lawsuit. |
Now let’s go into more detail.
The legal battle between Ripple Labs and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) began on December 22, 2020. The SEC accused Ripple’s CEO Brad Garlinghouse and co-founder Chris Larsen of conducting an unregistered securities offering by selling XRP, Ripple’s digital token.
According to the SEC, Ripple raised $1.3 billion through these alleged securities sales. Ripple denied the allegations, maintaining that XRP is a digital currency, not a security.
This lawsuit was pivotal for Ripple and raised concerns across the cryptocurrency industry.
For example, Coinbase announced the suspension of XRP trading on its platform starting on January 19, 2021, which resumed in 2023.
The discovery phase, or pre-trial stage of the lawsuit, brought heated disputes, particularly over internal SEC communications. Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn played a key role during this phase, ordering the SEC to release the ‘Hinman emails,’ despite their objections.
These emails revealed internal deliberations and discussions surrounding a 2018 speech by William Hinman, the former director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance (2017–2020).
In his speech , Hinman stated that based on his “understanding of the present state of Ether, the Ethereum network, and its decentralized structure, current offers and sales of Ether are not securities transactions.” Ripple used this statement to argue that XRP, like Ether (ETH), should not be treated as a security.
This statement became a focal point in Ripple’s defense, highlighting potential inconsistencies in the SEC’s classification of cryptocurrencies.
The emails became a turning point in 2023, as they revealed internal SEC disagreements over how cryptocurrencies should be classified.
Ripple’s defense used this to assert that the SEC lacked consistency in its approach and focused on demonstrating that XRP was a utility token with use cases beyond investment.
Judge Netburn’s rulings on the discovery disputes were instrumental in Ripple obtaining these documents, which shaped the case’s trajectory.
Date: Jul 13, 2023
Judge Analisa Torres, presiding in the Southern District of New York, delivered a significant ruling that clarified the regulatory status of XRP. The court distinguished between two types of XRP transactions:
This mixed ruling clarified key regulatory issues for Ripple and the cryptocurrency industry. The court ruled in favour of Ripple regarding programmatic sales, reassuring retail holders. However, it classified institutional sales as securities, underscoring the significance of how cryptocurrencies are marketed and sold.
The court also ruled that XRP itself is not inherently a security, relieving retail holders and potentially setting a precedent for other cryptocurrencies.
Following Judge Torres’ ruling, the court issued penalties for Ripple’s institutional sales violations on Aug 7, 2024.
The court ordered Ripple to pay a $125 million civil penalty. It denied the SEC’s requests for disgorgement of profits and additional prejudgment interest. Additionally, the court barred Ripple from violating securities laws in connection with institutional sales.
The denial of disgorgement was a notable victory for Ripple, limiting the financial impact of the judgment. Disgorgement refers to the legal requirement for a party to return profits gained from unlawful activities.
In this case, the SEC requested Ripple to repay the profits it earned from institutional sales of XRP, along with prejudgment interest. However, the court denied this request, citing insufficient evidence showing that investors were harmed or that Ripple’s actions caused financial losses.
The legal battle intensified when both Ripple and the SEC filed appeals on October 3, 2024. The appeals process moved to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, creating uncertainty for the cryptocurrency market:
It is important to note that throughout the SEC vs. Ripple case, various industry stakeholders, including the Blockchain Association, Coinbase, Chamber of Digital Commerce, Valhil Capital, LLC, Cryptillian Payment Systems, and others, filed amicus briefs, or friend-of-the-court briefs. Stakeholders filed a significant number of these briefs in late 2022 and early 2023 during the summary judgment phase in the District Court.
The appeals process in 2024 saw additional briefs, showing the cryptocurrency industry’s ongoing concern about the case’s impact on regulation and market stability in the US.
The SEC filed its opening brief on January 15, claiming the lower court wrongly applied the Howey test by treating institutional and retail XRP sales differently.
Many saw this as a final push by former SEC Chair Gary Gensler, with critics arguing that it was a repeat of claims the court had already rejected.
Ripple’s leadership was vocal about the ruling. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse remarked, “This is it – the moment we’ve been waiting for. The SEC will drop its appeal – a resounding victory for Ripple, for crypto, every way you look at it.”
Similarly, Ripple’s chief legal officer Stuart Alderoty stated on X, “Today, Ripple moves forward — stronger than ever. This landmark case set a precedent for the domestic crypto industry.”
In March 2025 Ripple announced the SEC was abandoning abandoning its appeal of the 2023 court ruling.
Despite the industry’s enthusiasm and the significant victory for Ripple, experts note that the SEC’s decision did not establish a binding legal precedent.
The battle ended with the May 8 settlement, where both parties agreed to drop appeals as part of the final resolution and the $50 million settlement agreement.
This outcome will carry significant weight for the cryptocurrency industry. The future might see more guidelines and regulation for a prosperous crypto market.
The Ripple vs. SEC case marked a pivotal moment for the cryptocurrency industry. Filed in 2020, the lawsuit challenged XRP’s classification as a security and revealed inconsistencies in the SEC’s approach, highlighted by internal documents like the Hinman emails.
Judge Torres’ 2023 ruling distinguished between programmatic XRP sales, which were not securities, and institutional sales, which were. In late 2024, the SEC argued that the court misapplied the Howey Test, while Ripple maintained its position with strong backing from industry amicus briefs.
The final settlement in May 2025 marked an influential moment for U.S. crypto regulation, carrying lasting implications for innovation and market stability.
The Hinman emails included internal SEC discussions about a 2018 speech by former SEC Director William Hinman, where he said Ether was not a security. Ripple argued these emails highlighted the SEC’s inconsistent stance on cryptocurrencies and supported their claim that XRP was not a security. Programmatic sales involve XRP sold to retail investors on exchanges through automated trading. Institutional sales are direct, large-scale XRP sales to institutions like hedge funds, often with contracts and discounts. This distinction was key in Judge Torres’ decision. The ruling largely upholds Judge Torres’ 2023 decision by confirming that XRP sales made programmatically (i.e., retail transactions) are non-securities, while institutional sales remain classified as securities—with some regulatory modifications that ease Ripple’s obligations. This outcome provides clearer regulatory guidelines for the crypto industry, though it stops short of setting a binding legal precedent.Why were the ‘Hinman emails’ so important to Ripple’s defense?
What is the difference between ‘programmatic sales’ and ‘institutional sales’ of XRP?
What is the significance of the final ruling delivered by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in March 2025?