Coinbase vs SEC First Hearing Concludes: Here’s What You Should Know!

In a highly anticipated ruling, Judge Analisa Torres declared Ripple the winner in the Ripple vs. SEC lawsuit, affirming that XRP is not a security. This outcome has captured significant attention, shining a spotlight on the ongoing legal battle between Coinbase and the SEC. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had filed a lawsuit against Coinbase and Binance in June, accusing them of allowing the trading of unregistered securities and failing to register themselves with the regulatory agency.

During the first hearing in the Coinbase vs. SEC lawsuit on Thursday, there have been significant developments as the judge’s questions provided insights into her perspective on this legal dispute. 

Here’s what transpired. Read on.

Coinbase vs SEC: The Battle Begins

Metaman, a prominent lawyer and cryptocurrency influencer, shared updates and insights on the proceedings via a series of tweets. According to Metaman, the case is being presided over by Judge Katherine Polka Faila of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Reports from the courtroom indicate a favorable outcome for Coinbase.

The judge acknowledged Coinbase’s belief that their actions were permissible based on the S-1 issuance.

“It’s not crazy for Coinbase to think what they were doing was OK.”

Notably, the judge inquired about the SEC’s stance on whether Ether qualifies as a security, to which the SEC lawyer responded that the Commission has not explicitly addressed it.

But Wait… Don’t Jump to Conclusions!

The discussion during the hearing also touched upon the Major Questions of Doctrine. The judge’s remarks revealed a level of skepticism toward the SEC’s messaging, indicating a potentially critical evaluation of the case. However, given the court’s busy docket, it may not be reasonable to expect swift rulings on pending motions.

Related: Did Ripple’s Win Just Leave SEC’s Case Against Coinbase Null and Void?

Metaman urged caution when drawing excessive conclusions from the judge’s statements during the initial conference, as her understanding is based on brief letters submitted by each side. Nonetheless, Metaman highlighted that the judge posed insightful questions and displayed skepticism toward certain responses from the SEC.