Ripple Labs has submitted a supplemental letter in support of the motion for an indicative ruling in the SEC lawsuit.
In a letter addressed to U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres, Ripple further explained why she should grant the parties’ request for an indicative ruling.
The recent filing comes less than a week after the SEC and Ripple refiled the motion to obtain an indicative ruling from Judge Torres.
For context, the parties request an indicative ruling from the judge to modify her final judgment by dismissing the permanent injunction imposed on Ripple’s future XRP sales and reducing the penalty to $50 million.
While the judge initially denied the request, the SEC and Ripple jointly refiled the indicative ruling motion to satisfy the ‘exceptional circumstances’ criteria. Ripple has now filed a supplemental letter supporting the recently filed motion.
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP @Ripple has filed a Supplemental Letter in support of the Motion for an Indicative Ruling. pic.twitter.com/yPTTugNIj8
— James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪 (@FilanLaw) June 17, 2025
Ripple’s Supplemental Letter
In the supplemental letter, Ripple clarified the scope of the requested relief. The filing stressed that the parties are not asking Judge Torres to revise her summary judgment order. Ripple acknowledged that the order remains binding on the company and serves as a guide to other courts.
Additionally, the motion contended that the potential dismissal of the permanent injunction does not absolve Ripple from complying with federal securities laws.
“[…] Like every other market participant, [Ripple] is obligated to follow the law, regardless of whether an injunction is imposed or not,” the motion read.
Meanwhile, according to the motion, granting the indicative ruling based on the settlement agreement would help end the multi-year legal dispute, potentially saving costs for the parties and the appellate court.
Furthermore, Ripple highlighted the SEC’s evolving crypto policy. It emphasized that the regulator has dismissed multiple crypto enforcement actions, established a Crypto Task Force unit, and signaled intentions to create regulatory standards for the industry.
Based on the SEC’s pro-crypto initiative, Ripple’s lawyers urge the court to grant the indicative ruling. They believe the relief would free the Second Circuit and District Court from further docket pressure.
Lawyers React
However, the filing has triggered reactions from several legal experts. Former SEC lawyer Marc Fagel suggested that Ripple’s supplemental letter adds no substance to the joint motion.
According to him, Ripple submitted the filing to address skeptics of its joint motion without presenting any new arguments.
Attorney Fred Rispoli, founder of Hodl Law, suggested that while the motion is not a powerhouse brief, he still thinks it is a crucial attempt. He pointed out that the letter addressed some glaring gaps in the previous motions, such as ending the appellate risk and reaffirming Ripple’s compliance with the summary judgment order.
Notably, while the motion is not a strong attempt, Rispoli said it could be enough to obtain the indicative ruling.
At 1.5 pgs, this is not the strongest attempt–but it's an attempt. This concisely addresses three issues that were so obviously unaddressed that Ripple finally realized it had to say something:
(1) the district court isn't the end-all of this case, appellate courts are–and… https://t.co/vwjR0Fbntb
— Fred Rispoli (@freddyriz) June 17, 2025
DisClamier: This content is informational and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author's personal opinions and do not reflect The Crypto Basic opinion. Readers are encouraged to do thorough research before making any investment decisions. The Crypto Basic is not responsible for any financial losses.
