#XRPCommunity #XRP via @RonwHammond "House Agriculture Committee ranking member G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) is linking up with a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus on a bill that would give the CFTC direct oversight over a huge swath of the crypto spot market.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) . . . signed on to sponsor pending legislation that would clear a path for the CFTC to take jurisdiction over large parts of the crypto marketplace; treating digital exchanges similarly to designated contract markets
and swap execution facilities. The bill is expected to get introduced later today with Rep. Darren Soto (D-Fla.), who like Khanna is a member of the Congressional Blockchain Caucus, attached as a co-sponsor. Thompson and Khanna’s legislation marks
the latest entrant in a series of crypto bills that have been floated as lawmakers and federal agencies hustle to create guardrails around the fast-growing industry. The bill, which is originating in a House Agriculture Committee that has oversight of the CFTC,
adds more fuel to an industry-wide push to give the financial derivatives regulator more sway over an industry that’s been highly critical of the approach taken by SEC Chair Gary Gensler — who’s repeatedly contended that most digital assets could be characterized as securities."
This is where Gensler digs in to protect what he sees as his turf. Controlling the exchanges has always been his hammer to control the crypto space. If he controls the exchanges, he controls what is traded on them. Don't expect anything but a huge fight from him and @SenWarren.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪90k+ (beware of imposters)

James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪90k+ (beware of imposters) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @FilanLaw

Apr 29
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP 1/ I have a few thoughts on the scheduling order. A couple of weeks ago I said that I thought briefing would start in July and end in November. That’s where Judge Torres ended up, but only because that was the schedule that worked best for
2/ the Court. Separate schedules were set for the motions challenging experts and for the Summary Judgment motions. That is important because of the “6 Month Rule,” which incents Judges to decide motions within 6 months after they are filed (the clock on the rule actually starts
3/ ticking 30 days after the motion is filed so the Judges get a 30 day grace period). The “6 month lists” are published twice a year, on March 31st and September 30th, and only list motions pending longer than six months that are still pending on those dates.
Read 9 tweets
Apr 20
#XRPCommunity #SECGov. v. #Ripple #XRP 1/ A SUMMARY JUDGMENT TIMELINE. I’m seeing a lot of discussion of timing projections for the filing of summary judgment motions and a decision on the motions. I thought I would weigh in because Judge Torres has a particular and very
2/ complicated process that must be completed before the motions for summary judgment can even be filed. The point of this thread is to help you understand that this is a longer process than you may realize.
3/ First, any party that wants to move for summary judgment has to provide the other parties an electronic copy, in Microsoft Word format, of its Statement of Material Facts pursuant to Local Rule 56.1. A Local Rule 56.1 Statement is a “short and concise statement,
Read 18 tweets
Apr 11
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP BREAKING: The Court has denied the SEC's Motion for Reconsideration of the DPP Ruling and granted the SEC's request for clarification of that ruling.

dropbox.com/s/34z4vvi8zyjo…
"The SEC has identified no intervening change of controlling law or any other controlling decisions unaddressed by the Court’s January 13, 2022 Order."
"The SEC’s assertion that the Speech was intended to communicate Corporation Finance’s approach to regulating digital asset offerings is inconsistent with the SEC’s and Hinman’s previous position that the Speech was intended to and did reflect his personal views."
Read 6 tweets
Apr 8
#XRPCommunity #XRP @EMPOWR_us scored some extraordinary emails regarding Bill Hinman, including one that shows that Hinman was warned that he has "a bar under the criminal financial conflict with Simpson because you have an ongoing financial interest in the firm." Image
"Meeting with them while having such a conflict is not permitted. As we discussed during your briefing - even calls with them are not permitted. It's also a serious optics issue - you can't be seen to be granting special access to a firm you have a financial interest in."
"But Bill, it occurs to us that you have a full financial conflict of interest with your old firm, not just an impartiality one. Hence, you should not be having any meetings with your old firm. Even group meetings." The SEC is desperate to keep its own Hinman emails from Ripple.
Read 4 tweets
Feb 18
#XRPCommunity #XRP #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP BREAKING: BELOW ARE THE TWO LEGAL MEMOS THAT HAVE NOW BEEN UNSEALED.

dropbox.com/s/j3ei8s01n0kt…

dropbox.com/s/fnwww4xuu1vj…
1/5 Overall favorable to Ripple and the Individual Defendants. Both memos are from Perkins Coie. The first memo was prepared in February 2012 and sent to Jed McCaleb and Jesse Powell. It says that if NewCoin is sold in what now would look like an ICO
2/5 (I didn’t see the term ICO used), it would be likely that it would be considered a security. But Ripple then revised its business plan and went back to Perkins Coie, which issued a second memo in October 2012. This second memo was sent to Chris Larsen and Jed McCaleb.
Read 6 tweets
Jan 12
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP Due to complications related to COVID, the parties have filed a joint letter requesting until February 28, 2022 to complete expert discovery, stating that the extension, if granted, will not “impact any other deadline in the case.”
My belief is that before filing this motion the parties agreed to specific dates for every remaining expert deposition, far enough out that they believe COVID won’t be a problem, so that they could say to the Court that all expert discovery would be completed by February 28th.
I understand people are frustrated by extensions of time, and I'm seeing a lot of responses critical of Ripple et al for agreeing to this one. I have a couple of thoughts. First, we are in really weird times and we just don't know what's happening behind the scenes.
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(