As the legal battle between the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and prominent cryptocurrency platforms intensifies, a federal judge has raised a pivotal question – why isn’t there a cohesive regulatory framework governing the crypto sphere?
State of Crypto, a CoinDesk newsletter exploring the convergence of cryptocurrency and government.Subscribe here for upcoming editions.
Unveiling the Story
The debate over the federal judiciary’s stance on crypto shows no sign of reaching a consensus. Judges are increasingly pointing out the absence of a unified regulatory approach to cryptocurrencies.
Significance
The validity of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s interpretation of how securities law is applicable to the crypto domain remains uncertain in the eyes of the federal judiciary. Rulings from various district courts indicate the absence of a straightforward answer. Judges are vocalizing the need for a regulatory framework, beyond just public declarations, to be established.
Analyzing the Situation
In recent developments, judges grilled attorneys representing the SEC and two cryptocurrency exchanges – Coinbase and Binance – regarding the federal agency’s case against the platforms. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, presiding over the SEC’s lawsuit against Binance, posed thought-provoking questions that emphasized the necessity for comprehensive regulatory guidance.
“Where’s the SEC been? Does that matter … why is it that if they’re trying to achieve legislation, is that some suggestion there’s something missing in the statute to cover this? Why are we doing this on a coin-by-coin, case-by-case, judge-by-judge litigation which depends on the … vagaries of the individual districts … as opposed to issuing a reg that tells everybody ‘this is it?'” she inquired.
In response to the arguments presented, the SEC attorney expressed dissent and contradicted the premise of the judge’s statements, stating, “I would disagree with the premise that the SEC has contradicted itself.” The SEC has maintained a clear standpoint on cryptocurrencies since 2017, following the DAO Report, asserting that the majority of cryptocurrencies appear to be securities.
These relentless exchanges of legal jargon bring to light the broader issue of consensus.
Judge Jackson’s line of inquiry suggested the pressing need for a unified approach when she probed whether there should be definitive determinations from Congress or the federal courts on the classification of certain cryptocurrencies as securities or commodities.
While these inquiries present a call for revolutionary changes, the judges’ frustration and calls for consensus indicate the urgent need for regulatory clarity in the crypto sector.
The imminent appeal of Judge Analisa Torres’ ruling in the SEC’s case against Ripple could potentially influence a shift in the regulatory landscape. Moreover, the possibility of Congress enacting legislation to redefine the SEC’s authority in the crypto space remains within reach.
Meanwhile, we anxiously await the rulings of Judges Jackson and Failla on the motions to dismiss the cases, although it is uncommon for such cases to be dismissed at this stage.
Monday
- 15:00 UTC (10:00 a.m. ET) The SEC and Binance answered questions before a federal judge.
- (IOActive Labs) IOActive disclosed a series of exploits and vulnerabilities that granted its researchers access to a bitcoin ATM. These vulnerabilities have since been addressed.
- (Bloomberg) Bloomberg’s Lydia Beyoud profiled the SEC and Chair Gary Gensler.
- (The Wall Street Journal) The Wall Street Journal’s Elaine Yu and Weilun Soon reported on how crypto traders in China are transacting in digital assets.
If you have thoughts on what should be discussed next week or any other feedback you’d like to share, feel free to email me at nik@coindesk.com or find me on Twitter @nikhileshde.
You can also join the group conversation on Telegram.
See you next week!
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
