XRP Decentralization Defended by Ripple Advocate

XRP and its decentralized nature have come under intense scrutiny over the years, but recent remarks from attorney John E. Deaton have reignited the conversation — and possibly put lingering doubts to rest.

John E. Deaton, a prominent legal advocate in the Ripple versus SEC legal battle, recently countered one of the most common narratives in the crypto space: that Ripple’s significant XRP holdings automatically mean the XRP Ledger is centralized. His remarks have shed light on a more nuanced understanding of decentralization and how it applies to blockchain ecosystems like XRP.

Deaton emphasized that assessing decentralization purely based on the quantity of tokens held by a single entity is overly simplistic and fundamentally flawed. While Ripple does own approximately 40% of the total XRP supply, Deaton argues this alone does not make XRP centralized. Instead, the focus should be broader—looking at how successfully the technology is adopted and utilized globally.

He backed his argument with a powerful example: over 75,000 individuals from more than 140 countries participated by supporting his amicus motion against the SEC in the ongoing legal case. This widespread involvement, according to Deaton, is a stronger indicator of decentralization than token ownership.

Additionally, Deaton highlighted an often overlooked distinction between the XRP token and the XRP Ledger, pointing out that many debates conflate the two. The XRP Ledger operates on different principles than most blockchains by using a consensus protocol rather than a proof-of-work mining system. This design choice enhances scalability and efficiency while minimizing the influence any single party — including Ripple — might have over the network’s functionality.

Adding weight to Deaton’s defense, Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer, David Schwartz, has long maintained that validators on the XRP Ledger are independent and unpaid, meaning they are motivated not by financial incentives but by the reliability and utility of the system. Schwartz reiterates that Ripple, though a validator in its own right, holds no special privilege that allows it to enforce changes without consensus. All proposed updates or changes must be approved by the decentralized network of validators, most of whom are not affiliated with Ripple in any formal capacity.

At the core of this discussion is a broader legal and philosophical debate about what truly constitutes decentralization in the cryptocurrency space. As digital assets continue to evolve, different models of governance and network control are emerging. XRP finds itself at the center of this evolution — scrutinized by regulators and the community alike.

Deaton’s latest commentary reflects a growing sentiment within the crypto community: that decentralization should be measured by practical control and user participation rather than rigid, outdated metrics. The XRP ecosystem is not defined solely by Ripple’s actions but by a diverse network of contributors and users who help validate and guide the network daily.

Related: Expert Advice: Sell XRP If You’re Confused

As blockchain technology matures and legal frameworks begin to take shape, nuanced interpretations of decentralization—like those offered by Deaton—are likely to play a crucial role in shaping both regulation and perception. The XRP Ledger, with its globally distributed validators and vibrant user base, may well embody the true spirit of decentralization more than critics give it credit for.