Ripple Vs. SEC Battle Update: Lawsuit Officially Over As $125M Receipt Of Payment To Regulator Surfaces

bitcoinistPublicado a 2025-09-23Actualizado a 2025-09-23

Resumen

Former SEC lawyer Marc Fagel has revealed that the $125 million monetary penalty in the Ripple Vs. SEC case has...

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

Former SEC lawyer Marc Fagel has revealed that the $125 million monetary penalty in the Ripple Vs. SEC case has been paid to the U.S. Treasury. This officially ends the long-running legal battle between the crypto firm and the regulator. 

Ripple Vs. SEC Case Ends As Crypto Firm Pays Monetary Judgment

In an X post, Fagel confirmed that the $125 million penalty in the Ripple vs. SEC case was paid to the U.S. Treasury last month. He shared a letter addressed to Judge Analisa Torres, which stated that both parties had agreed to the release of the funds from escrow for the crypto firm to pay the full court-ordered penalty plus statutory interest. 

Furthermore, the letter revealed that the SEC had provided the appropriate wire transfer instructions after which Ripple directed the bank to make the payment, and the bank confirmed that the agreed amount had been released. Meanwhile, the balance of the fund was returned to the crypto firm, with all these procedures formally ending the Ripple vs. SEC case. 

Ripple
Source: Document from Marc Fagel on X

Notably, this payment follows the Court of Appeals’ approval of both parties’ motion to dismiss their respective appeals in the Ripple vs. SEC case last month. The $125 million had been kept in escrow around the time when Ripple and the SEC filed their appeals. The crypto firm had asked for this as an injunction to prevent having to pay the SEC while the appeal was ongoing, since there was the possibility of the sum being reduced. 

The appeal didn’t proceed as planned, as the emergence of a pro-crypto SEC administration following Trump’s return to the White House led to a settlement between both parties. However, Judge Torres opted against adopting the settlement agreement and ordered that Ripple must still pay the $125 million penalty. Both parties agreed to dismiss their respective appeals in the Ripple vs. SEC and simply adhere to Judge Torres’ judgment.  

Lawsuit No Longer Responsible For Price Action 

In an X post, legal expert Bill Morgan remarked that the Ripple vs. SEC lawsuit excuse has run its course for any further lack of XRP adoption or flat price action. Basically, the lawsuit cannot be held responsible if the XRP price underperforms moving forward. The altcoin had rallied to as high as $3.4 following the joint motion to dismiss the case, but has traded below this level since then. 

The XRP price is currently on a downtrend amid the broader crypto market correction. Morgan pointed out that the current XRP decline is due to the heavy correlation with Bitcoin. This came as he made light of the fact that the altcoin has been down during this period despite several bullish fundamentals that have emerged. 

At the time of writing, the XRP price is trading at around $2.87, down in the last 24 hours, according to data from CoinMarketCap.

XRP
XRP trading at $2.86 on the 1D chart | Source: XRPUSDT on Tradingview.com
Featured image from Getty Images, chart from Tradingview.com
Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

Scott Matherson is a leading crypto writer at Bitcoinist, who possesses a sharp analytical mind and a deep understanding of the digital currency landscape. Scott has earned a reputation for delivering thought-provoking and well-researched articles that resonate with both newcomers and seasoned crypto enthusiasts. Outside of his writing, Scott is passionate about promoting crypto literacy and often works to educate the public on the potential of blockchain.

Lecturas Relacionadas

a16z: In the AI Era, Company Competition for Talent Starts with Job Title Naming

The article discusses how companies in the AI era are competing for talent through strategic "title arbitrage," or the renaming of key roles to reflect and attract new, high-value capabilities. It uses Palantir's creation of the "Forward-Deployed Engineer" (FDE) as a prime example. This title reframed client-facing technical work from a peripheral "implementation" role into a core, high-status engineering function. The move was strategic, allowing Palantir to attract talent that blended technical skill with business acumen and to dominate the market's perception of this capability. The piece argues that job titles are an organizational language that signals the value and authority of certain work. Effective new titles, like "Data Scientist" or "Site Reliability Engineer," emerge when a role's strategic importance genuinely outgrows its old name. Conversely, mere title inflation without substantive change is ineffective. For AI companies, particularly in B2B, this is a crucial strategy. AI transformation creates new high-leverage roles (e.g., "Legal Engineer," "GTM Engineer") that combine domain expertise with technical automation. By naming these roles, a company can help clients internally legitimize these change-makers. This, in turn, builds market mindshare, associating the company with the new capability. In conclusion, as AI blurs the lines between product and service, the ability to accurately name and organize the critical, client-adjacent work that defines product learning will be a key competitive advantage. The first to define this new organizational language plants a flag in the market's mind.

marsbitHace 27 min(s)

a16z: In the AI Era, Company Competition for Talent Starts with Job Title Naming

marsbitHace 27 min(s)

Interview with Strategy CEO: Can STRC Recover After Selling Bitcoin?

Interview with Strategy CEO Phong Le on the recent sale of 32 Bitcoin and its impact. He clarifies the move was a small, strategic action to demonstrate liquidity to debt holders, test internal processes, and prove operational discipline—not a response to fears of a "death spiral" from DeFi protocols leveraging STRC (Strategy's preferred stock product), which he notes holds less than 10% of STRC. Le emphasizes Strategy’s long-term focus as the largest corporate Bitcoin holder, using the adage that markets are a "voting machine" short-term but a "weighing machine" long-term. Decision-making is data-driven, involving the board, complex modeling, and multiple stakeholder considerations, moving beyond a founder-centric model. He outlines various capital options but stresses the strategic importance of "doing nothing" as a valid choice, citing resilience built during the 2022 bear market. Le expresses unwavering belief in Bitcoin's foundational value for global sovereignty and its future role in an AI-driven economy with trillions of autonomous agents. Addressing STRC's current price below its $100 face value, Le explains recent pressure was due to using dollar reserves for bond buybacks. He expects STRC to return to par as reserves are replenished and its semi-monthly dividend payments begin, noting the product is heavily over-collateralized. Finally, Le confirms the company sold Bitcoin the week prior to May 31st, as disclosed in an 8-K filing, leaving prediction market interpretations to others. The overarching philosophy remains "Spread Bitcoin with love," embracing all methods of gaining Bitcoin exposure.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Interview with Strategy CEO: Can STRC Recover After Selling Bitcoin?

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

IOSG Founder: Ethereum Doesn't Need Another Leap of Technical Faith, It Needs a Musk-style Compromise

Jocy, founder of IOSG Ventures, argues that Ethereum does not need renewed technological faith but a "Musk-like compromise." The recent formation of ETHLabs—funded by major ETH holders like BitMine and Lubin—highlights a market-driven move to fill a gap left by the Ethereum Foundation (EF), signaling a loss of confidence in its decentralized, hands-off approach. The core critique contrasts Vitalik Buterin's (V) idealistic, technology-first vision with Elon Musk's pragmatic, business-driven execution. The author asserts Ethereum's current shortage is not another technical roadmap but a clear, real-world application narrative and a leader willing to engage directly with commercial realities—like Musk. Internal issues are emphasized, citing EF's management problems and talent drain. While the new decentralized model with independent nodes like ETHLabs addresses the single foundation's limitations, it risks fragmentation without cohesive direction. True cohesion, the author suggests, must come from a shared, compelling narrative around ETH's value, not just from aligned financial interests. Independence claims for new entities are seen as aspirational, needing years of transparency to build trust. The ultimate threat is not competitors like Solana, but the broader shift of attention and talent toward AI. Ethereum has a limited window—12 to 18 months—to recapture focus by delivering tangible, real-world applications. The conclusion urges V to shift from abstract ideals to grounded, pragmatic leadership. The time for this crucial pivot is running out.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

IOSG Founder: Ethereum Doesn't Need Another Leap of Technical Faith, It Needs a Musk-style Compromise

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片