The SEC surrendered silently in its greatest cryptographic battle

The greatest and most consistent legal war of the cryptographic world has finally ended. Ripple Labs, a Fintech giant, has just closed the book about his battle of almost five years with the United States Stock Exchange and Securities Commission, ending a fight that had become a proxy for the future of cryptocurrency regulation in the United States.

The surprise agreement is being acclaimed as a historical victory for the cryptographic industry and a significant blow to the controversial “application regulation” strategy of the SEC.

“The SEC announces joint stipulation to dismiss the appeals, solving the civil execution action against Ripple and two of its executives,” said the regulator in a statement July 7.

What was the fight?

Ripple is a company that uses its cryptocurrency, XRP, to make international money transfers faster and cheaper than traditional banking systems. In 2020, the SEC sued Ripple, claiming that XRP was unregistered security. In simple terms, security is an investment contract, as an action. If a cryptographic token is considered security, you must follow the same strict rules of registration and dissemination, a standard that most cryptographic projects have not been met. A victory of the SEC could have effectively forbidden XRP in the USA. And establish a precedent to paralyze hundreds of other tokens.

On August 7, the fight ended officially. The SEC announced a “joint stipulation to dismiss the appeals, solving the civil application action against Ripple”, while Ripple agreed to abandon its cross appeal. The final judgment of the lower court, including a fine of $ 125 million, will remain in force, but the war has ended.

While Ripple is paying a fine.$ 50 million-, the company is moving away with a much more valuable prize: a legal precedent that changes the game. A 2023 ruling by Judge Analisa Torres gave the SEC a great blow to find that XRP sales of Ripple in public exchanges, where buyers are anonymous and do not deal directly with the company, did not qualify as transactions of values. That part of the decision remains intact.

This is a big problem. Create a crucial distinction that other cryptography projects can now use in their own legal battles, potentially protecting them from the statement of the SEC of general authority over the market. When choosing to resolve instead of risking this decision confirmed by a superior court, the SEC has demonstrated the limits of its “application regulation” play book: its strategy of creating rules through individual demands instead of issuing clear guidelines for the industry.

As Ripple’s legal director, Stuart Alderoty, wrote in X, is “the end … and now back to business.”

After the vote of the commission today, the SEC and Ripple were formally presented directly to the second circuit to dismiss their appeals.

The end … and now back to business. https://t.co/nvqthcfot

– Stuart Alderoty (@S_Alderoty) August 7, 2025

What it means to Main Street

While both parties can claim partial victories, the largest winner is possibly Main Street, or everyday investors and developers who have been trapped in regulatory chaos for years. The brutal legal battle forced a court to confirm that not all digital assets are automatically values, especially when the public negotiates it. This provides a lighter set of rules, although still incomplete. For investors, it reduces the risk of their holdings being declared illegal during the night. For innovators, it provides a slightly clearer path to build compatible projects in the United States, bringing the industry closer to conventional legitimacy.

Our shot

The SEC has spent years trying to define the cryptographic industry through litigation. The Ripple case shows that the strategy is losing steam. The agency’s decision to resolve instead of risking another loss of the Court could be emboldened to other cryptographic companies to defend themselves instead of accepting rapid agreements. This marks the beginning of a new chapter in the Crypto-Washington confrontation, one where legal and political pressure can finally be forcing a rethinking of the way in which the United States regulates digital assets.