XRP remains at the center of one of the most pivotal legal battles in crypto history, and now, legal analyst Ashley Prosper has outlined key scenarios that could compel Judge Analisa Torres to reevaluate her earlier decision in the ongoing SEC vs. Ripple case.
Just last week, Judge Torres surprised both the crypto industry and XRP holders by rejecting a joint request from Ripple and the SEC. The motion had sought an indicative ruling to modify the court’s final judgment, allowing the parties to settle on new terms. Despite their agreement to replace the original $125 million penalty with a significantly reduced $50 million fine—and forgo a permanent injunction—the judge denied the request, citing a procedural misstep.
As Ripple and the SEC are expected to resubmit a corrected motion, Prosper shared insights on what could influence Judge Torres to vacate her ruling entirely—an unusual but possible legal maneuver.
Classified Evidence Highlighting Federal Interest in XRP
Prosper indicated that the court might be persuaded if new, confidential evidence is introduced showing XRP’s strategic importance to U.S. government interests. He suggested that submitting sealed documents—such as U.S. Treasury memos endorsing XRP’s use in a national digital asset reserve system—could shift the court’s perspective significantly. Prosper also mentioned that a Department of Justice briefing warning about the lawsuit’s impact on meaningful financial or international protocols could serve as grounds for vacating the judgment.
He emphasized that judges often yield when federal interests are clearly demonstrated, especially in cases involving national policy and international implications. Such sealed submissions would be confidential but could profoundly reshape the outcome if presented effectively.
Federal Executive Branch Intervention
The entry of a U.S. executive agency, such as the Treasury Department or the Federal Reserve, into the legal proceedings would represent another potential catalyst for a judicial reversal. If such a branch were to file an amicus curiae brief formally supporting Ripple and XRP’s role in the nation’s financial infrastructure, it could influence the court’s decision under the principle of Chevron deference—allowing courts to accept an agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous law.
Although rare, Prosper highlighted examples from other federal cases where judicial decisions were altered because of positions presented by key governmental entities. Should the Treasury, for instance, argue for XRP as a cornerstone of sovereign-grade financial systems or cross-border payment mechanisms, Judge Torres might reconsider the current ruling to avoid conflicts with national economic strategies.
Such developments could alter XRP’s standing significantly, moving it beyond a utility token into a role of national financial significance. Prosper portrayed a scenario where XRP could evolve into a financial bridge overseen or supported by governmental bodies.
Community Reactions and Speculation
While these potential developments are rooted in procedural and precedent-based legal theory, not all observers are convinced. Within the XRP community, reactions to Prosper’s analysis have been mixed, with several members expressing skepticism. Many consider these scenarios speculative and question whether such high-level government involvement is realistic.
Nonetheless, Prosper emphasized that the combination of revealing classified government materials and formal support from federal branches could make a compelling case. He believes Judge Torres remains open to reevaluating her stance if confronted with evidence or arguments that reframe XRP and Ripple’s roles within the nation’s broader economic interests.
Related: Expert Advice: Sell XRP If You’re Confused
As the SEC and Ripple prepare to refile their amended motion, all eyes are on the courtroom once again. The outcome could not only influence Ripple’s future but might also redefine XRP’s place in the U.S. financial ecosystem.
