The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is having a bad day due to the district court judge's decision regarding the SEC's actions regarding Ripple's XRP token.

The SEC knows all too well how its approach to crypto has been met with a backlash in federal courts, posting a vulgarly written statement that is so far from reality that it might make Donald Trump reconsider before sending it out. If the decision is not overturned, we can say that SEC Chairman Gary Gensler's approach to creating regulation through sanctions against crypto assets is coming to an end and hard days are coming for those who oppose crypto.
Could it be predicted that things would go here? Of course, almost anyone could have predicted such a situation, except for a small group in Washington who were blindly adhered to the belief that "all tokens are securities". These processes take months, although the SEC will appeal the district court's decision. It is also valuable in terms of timing that this issue comes on top of the discussions in the US Congress about establishing a regulatory framework for cryptoassets.
To understand why the policy debate has changed and what kind of rules tokens will have to abide by, it is necessary to look at the history of the long and painstaking journey of the crypto policy framework.
Bringing crypto-assets into a regulatory space is an approach that Republicans and Democrats have long supported in Washington. From what I've seen during my stint as a spokesperson for the U.S. Treasury Department and prior to that in my administrative duties in Congress, the main point of view is that whether you like crypto or not, crypto will persist, and a regulatory structure is needed to avoid risks to customers such as corruption, illegal financing, and economic disruption. .
Aside from realistic strategy efforts to regulate rather than ban crypto, for some in DC, eradicating crypto has become a passion. By emphasizing that crypto assets are nothing but securities and that the players here are trying to evade the law, these people do not hesitate to sabotage the process of proper regulation in this area as much as they can. The “many tokens are actually securities” approach is a discourse that paves the way for the SEC.
The SEC's approach to regulation through sanctions was not blocked by the courts until early 2023. Those who want to suffocate crypto in the US are trying to convince Democrats, who seek a nonpartisan agreement, that such regulation is unnecessary and harmful.
Sap rotary calculator rotates
Ironically, a major breach in the strategy of the SEC and the anti-crypto community has been made following the court ruling, and anti-cryptoists may have to adopt a regulatory framework that allows much more crypto than before.
Democrats, too, may have to say yes to a Republican draft rather than a self-penned crypto framework under their control. As the SEC and anti-crypto democrats lose their legal footing, the prospects for a nonpartisan framework for crypto assets rise.
Hard and bad days are coming for the SEC and those who support its approach. Democrats' resistance to crypto will also decrease if other lawsuits similar to the Ripple case are lost. In other words, if they lose, they will lose big, and the other side is aware that their negotiation power is decreasing.
While the SEC has not succeeded in eradicating crypto in the US, what they have done to curb crypto may pave the way for a more nonpartisan framework that allows it to be more deeply integrated into the economy. So for those eager to destroy crypto in the US, not so good days are coming.
#BountyCreator# #HotTopicDiscussion# #ContentStar#