The SEC Came to Destroy Crypto, Not to Regulate It

By Roslyn Layton. (DC Journal). April 3, 2024.

Following the Securities and Exchange Commission’s effort to stretch, bend and twist the law to grant itself authority to regulate cryptocurrencies has been like watching an exhausting video game. By the last level, the monster has grown so grotesque and ridiculous that you’re just waiting for the relief of seeing it explode so the comforting words “game over” can finally appear.

Unfortunately, it’s not a game for many innovative U.S. Financial Tech companies. The SEC has mobilized all its resources to carry out a policy against crypto companies that is not designed to protect investors from fraud or even to clarify what legal compliance means. It is practicing what professor J.W. Verret of George Mason University has called “enforcement by destruction,” trying to turn courts into execution chambers for an industry it never intended to regulate but to destroy.

It comes down to a bait-and-switch strategy by two successive SEC chairmen to claim that every digital asset, no matter how it is designed, is itself a “crypto asset security,” and that gives the agency full authority to require they be registered like stocks. Nothing in nearly a century of securities law provides the SEC such all-encompassing authority over an entire asset class. But the SEC’s strategy was never to prove this theory in court so much as to have a pretext to launch enforcement actions never meant to bring anyone into compliance.

Read the full piece here: DC Journal

The SEC Is Engaging In Regulation By Destruction

By J.W. Verret. (Law360). April 1, 2024.

The term “regulation by enforcement” was coined in 1990 by Harvey Pitt in his days as a Yale law professor, about a decade after he served as general counsel of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and before he became chair of the SEC. The warning was eerily similar to President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s farewell address cautioning about the growth of the military-industrial complex.

Regulation by enforcement has become manifest in the SEC’s approach to the emerging technology of cryptocurrencies, using lawsuits instead of rulemaking to claim that all digital assets are unregistered securities and fully under the commission’s authority.

Pitt’s term doesn’t fully capture what the SEC’s strategy on crypto has evolved into: “Enforcement by destruction” is more apt.

There is a lengthening docket of SEC lawsuits over unregistered crypto-asset securities, where no fraud was alleged and there has been no evidence of harm to investors.[1] Some of the SEC’s chosen defendants don’t have the resources to properly fight the allegations, and must choose between surrender or bankruptcy — and may end up with both. And those that do, like Ripple Labsface nearly $2 billion in fines from the SEC.

Private litigators understand spurious claims can be an effective means of drowning a defendant in legal costs even for meritless litigation. The SEC’s apparent adoption of this tactic has come to dominate its enforcement actions alleging failure to register crypto-asset securities.

It knows it may lose on the merits of its claims, as it did for most of the claims in the Ripple case, but is seemingly betting that the financial harm of prolonged litigation will far outweigh an eventual fine and the defendants will fold. The SEC gets a victorious press release, but the markets get no clarity on what compliance actually means.

The SEC could have easily provided that clarity by granting Coinbase‘s 2023 petition for a crypto rulemaking from the commission after the company received a Wells notice a year ago, but the SEC has stubbornly refused to take up the request, which is now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.[2]

The SEC’s apparent shift to destruction as a tactic was evident in its 2022 lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire against LBRY, which built a blockchain-based content platform seeking to be a decentralized and uncensored version of YouTube. The SEC said LBRY’s distribution of the LBC token, a form of user credit on its platform, was an unregistered securities offering. The company decided to fight in court without the financial heft to mount a strong defense.

By the time LBRY later went bankrupt and shut down during the remedies phase, the SEC had reduced the fine it was seeking from $22 million to a mere $111,614. This provoked a public dissent by SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce, who questioned the proportionality and fairness of causing “the demise of a company” in a dispute over registering a token.[3]

“This case illustrates the arbitrariness and real-life consequences of the Commission’s misguided enforcement-driven approach to crypto,” Peirce said.

In my own review of settlements obtained between 2019 and today where the SEC simply alleged unregistered offerings of crypto-asset securities, the civil penalties it ultimately collected averaged 11.6% of the alleged unregistered sales. If no investors were defrauded or harmed in any of these cases, what was the point of threatening these companies with destruction if they opted to defend themselves?

Unlike LBRY, Ripple had the resources to fight the SEC’s allegation that all sales of its XRP digital token, even on public exchanges, are unregistered investment contracts in Ripple. After more than three years in court, U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in July 2023 found only a narrow set of actual investment contracts with institutional investors were unregistered securities, and dismissed the rest of the SEC’s claims.

Ripple is now eight months into the remedies stage. The SEC also promises to appeal Judge Torres’ ruling despite it being narrowly tailored to facts and circumstances and not setting any precedent. Brad Garlinghouse, Ripple’s CEO, said in December 2022 that the case has cost the company over $100 million so far, having long offered to settle in exchange for the legal clarity that Judge Torres ultimately provided.[4]

But the SEC on March 27 revised its demand to now nearly $2 billion in fines for those institutional sales where all the investors made money.[5] Actual regulation or useful legal clarity won’t be a result, since even if courts determine that some sales were of securities, the courts can’t fashion a workable registration regime for crypto. Only the SEC can do that. What results instead is just more legal costs.

Regulation by enforcement has always been an opaque process that fails to clearly define the rules or what compliance entails. The SEC’s use of it against digital assets indicates it’s more interested in causing harm to crypto companies than providing guidance to the markets or protecting investors.

The consequences of this shift are far-reaching. By pursuing this strategy, the SEC risks permanent damage to its authority and credibility for little reward. It also opens the door for financially secure defendants like Ripple to make arguments to appellate courts on wider questions of law, which could ultimately boomerang on the commission.

The more the SEC engages in enforcement by destruction, the higher the likelihood that its legacy will be one of undermining the very principles it is meant to uphold.


J.W. Verret is an associate professor at the George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School. He is a former member of the SEC’s Investor Advisory Committee.

The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of their employer, its clients, or Portfolio Media Inc., or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

[1] Good list here: https://www.morrisoncohen.com/insights/the-morrison-cohen-cryptocurrency-litigation-tracker. You will see a list of them starting on page 4, most do not allege fraud but only failure to register with the SEC.

[2] https://www.sec.gov/files/rules/petitions/2022/petn4-789.pdf.

[3] https://www.sec.gov/news/statement/peirce-statement-lbry-102723.

[4] https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/wall-street-veteran-is-the-face-of-crypto-in-ripple-sec-fight.

[5] See last week’s news at https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-ripple-well-positioned-pay-044615741.html.

America must lead on cryptocurrency

By Dave McCormick. (Washington Examiner). March 26, 2024.

Across my career at the intersection of national security and our economy, I have witnessed firsthand several game-changing technological revolutions. From GPS to the internet and from smartphones to artificial intelligence, our nation’s unmatched capacity to innovate has created unprecedented benefits for the economy and security.

Another wave is upon us: Blockchain and crypto offer America the chance to lead another generation of critical innovation, but policymakers must do their part, or this opportunity will slip away. If the Biden White House and Congress don’t provide the support and regulatory certainty this burgeoning industry requires, there is little doubt it will develop and thrive elsewhere.

Blockchain is a technology that provides a transparent ledger for something of value. Crypto uses blockchain to enable transactions between people online. The benefits of America leading in blockchain and crypto are clear. 

First, these technologies are grounded in principles such as individual freedom, limited government, and privacy, which, as a conservative, I hold dear. Conducting transactions through blockchain eliminates powerful and oftentimes expensive intermediaries, making the financial system more accessible.

While the ledgers showing transactions are public, the identity of account holders is anonymous, providing privacy for accounts doing legal transactions while exposing illicit transactions to significant scrutiny. This balance between privacy and the free flow of data is sorely needed in an age in which social media platforms and other tech companies have unparalleled data on every user.

Read more here: Washington Examiner.

Judge slams SEC for ‘gross abuse of power’ in crypto case, imposes sanctions

By Leo Schwartz. (Fortune Crypto). 3/18/24.

On Monday, a federal judge took the unprecedented step of imposing sanctions on the Securities and Exchange Commission related to a lawsuit the agency brought against the Utah-based crypto company DEBT Box in July.

The case drew widespread attention after the defendants accused the SEC of misrepresenting key facts when the agency obtained a temporary restraining order to freeze assets on the crypto platform. After U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby ordered the SEC to explain its actions, lawyers for the agency admitted the SEC had committed errors, but asked Shelby not to issue a formal punishment.

In Monday’s decision, Shelby denied the SEC’s request, citing multiple instances of “bad faith” conduct and finding the agency responsible for a “gross abuse of power.” In the 80-page filing, Shelby imposed a sanction in the form of a requirement for the agency to pay for DEBT Box’s attorneys’ fees and costs related to the restraining order. The judge also denied the SEC’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit without prejudice, which would have meant the agency could bring the lawsuit again at a later date.

“[The SEC’s conduct] substantially undermined the integrity of these proceedings and the judicial process,” Shelby wrote.

Read more here: Fortune Crypto.

Gary Gensler’s Blundering SEC Mirrors Biden’s Incompetence

By Gerard Scimeca. (RealClear Markets). March 6, 2024.

Touting historically low approval ratings rivaling that of paper cuts and hay fever, one might think Joe Biden and his handlers cared enough about voter sentiment to address the more problematic areas of his administration serving to inflame his unpopularity. 

An obvious place to start would be to cut bait with the capricious, reckless, and rogue Chairman at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Gary Gensler. That Biden has yet to remove the haughty Gensler is an affirmation of all that is wrong with his presidency and the SEC itself, whose continued bungling has drawn the ire of millions of American investors. 

After 10 years of denials, last month the SEC approved a number of spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs), even as Gensler himself continued to denounce them. While the occasion represents a watershed moment for digital assets in the U.S., the approval was given grudgingly by a Commission boxed into a legal corner.

Read more here: RealClear Markets

To Restore the SEC’s Credibility, Appoint a New Chair

By Rep. Todd Tiahrt. (RealClear Policy). February 21, 2024.

Economic uncertainty is one of the top issues facing the country today. Many Americans have been forced to rethink their spending habits while concerns about job stability and fluctuating market conditions are leading families to focus more on savings and debt reduction as they prepare for potential financial challenges ahead.  

To guide the United States through this tumultuous period, it is crucial to have trustworthy and reliable regulators who can stabilize markets during a crisis and who will collaborate with American businesses throughout such instability. That is why it is difficult to comprehend why Gary Gensler remains President Joe Biden’s chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). It is even a puzzle why President Biden selected him in the first place.

After a scandal-tinged tenure as President Barack Obama’s chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Gensler has led a series of gaffe-prone crusades against American companies as SEC Chairman with embarrassing results. A recent study found that most of the flurry of proposed and finalized rules under Gensler was not tied to any authority granted to the SEC by Congress. He has mostly freelanced, letting politics and press releases guide his actions rather than the letter of the law.

Read more here: RealClear Policy

CryptoLaw: Looking Ahead

By Kristi Warner

Since CryptoLaw launched in 2021, we have accomplished so much as a community. John started CryptoLaw as a reaction to “gross government overreach” – his goal was to build a trusted platform that people could turn to for news, updates, and analysis on legal and policy issues related to digital assets and the cryptocurrency industry. Through the years, and all the cases, we have stayed true to that mission – we have been an advocate for digital assets, but more importantly we have been an advocate for the truth. 

Our plan for 2024 is to continue that mission. We are committed to holding government agencies accountable, shedding light on the revolving doors, promoting fair regulatory guidelines for the industry, and protecting investors every single day. 

As someone who has been with CryptoLaw since the start, and has seen what the platform and the audience behind it has accomplished, I am fully confident and excited for our future. We already have some big things planned for 2024, and we can’t wait to share them with you. Thank you for your support, CryptoLaw would not exist or be important without you, and we can’t wait for another ground-breaking year.

For more insight, please watch our recent livecast – CryptoLaw 2024: What to Expect

Hinman Investigation: The Chance for the SEC to Get Something Right

By John E. Deaton.

It didn’t just take a village. It took an army of activists, lawyers and everyday citizens to demand, insist and even sue the Securities and Exchange Commission to be transparent. From the moment William Hinman got on that stage in San Francisco on June 14, 2018, to declare that Ethereum’s native token, Ether, is not a security, something just didn’t seem right.

Indeed, that speech didn’t appear on Hinman’s official SEC calendar. The SEC has also forcefully refused under several chairman – including current Chairman Gary Gensler – to ever prejudge the status of a digital token with one very glaring exception: Hinman’s speech on Ether.

After six years, many lawsuits and tens of thousands of messages flooding into Washington, we learned today that the SEC Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is “in the final stages” of an investigation into the clear appearance of impropriety and conflicts of interest around Hinman’s speech and his many actions as SEC Director of Corporation Finance. My further understanding is that the investigation will delve into how the SEC ethics staff handled Hinman’s documented actions, or failed to.

It started with hundreds of internet sleuths working together in what I call decentralized justice. We discovered quickly that Hinman’s annual financial disclosures at the SEC showed he was receiving millions of dollars in payments from his old law firm, Simpson Thacher. We also learned that Simpson Thacher was a member of the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance, a group with the sole purpose of promoting Ethereum. Dozens of videos were located that had Hinman and other SEC officials, as well as key investors and stakeholders in Ethereum, saying in their own words what was happening in front of the cameras and behind the scenes around what Hinman called “the Ether speech”. I put them all together in a Video Library on the CryptoLaw website, and the evidence of possible conflicts of interest took shape.

At the same time, the excellent legal team defending Ripple, Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsen against the SEC’s lawsuit on the XRP digital token were locked in a long discovery fight over getting the internal emails and drafts of Hinman’s speech. That took years because the SEC fought so hard to hide the Hinman documents, defying so many court orders to produce them, that Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn called them out for their lack of “faithful allegiance to the law.” As amicus counsel for 75,000 XRP holders in that case, I couldn’t agree more with Judge Netburn’s conclusion.

In August 2021, the government watchdog organization Empower Oversight jumped into the fight, with Freedom of Information Act requests and lawsuits when the SEC refused to comply. It took them years to force the SEC to produce the emails that proved how Hinman fought to receive million in payments from Simpson Thacher. They showed he was warned repeatedly he had a “criminal financial conflict” if he ever had any contact with that law firm, and he ignored them.

The Hinman emails obtained by Empower Oversight show he met over and over with Simpson Thacher, including with the head of their China office – Chris Lin – when his client had a pending IPO application before his division. The emails also showed direct contact between Joseph Lubin, one of the highest profile third party promoters of Ether, and Hinman before the 2018 speech.

In May 2022, Empower Oversight sent a referral of evidence about these conflicts to the SEC OIG. For almost two years, the group has been requesting internal communications about that referral and has been locked in litigation with the SEC to get compliance with those requests. That’s why today’s news confirming the OIG investigation is so important, and such a vindication for the thousands of people who have worked so hard to make this government agency transparent and compliant with the law.

I will not prejudge the SEC OIG’s investigation, nor should anyone else. They have pledged to give a redacted version of their final report to Empower Oversight, which means it will be made public for us to review ourselves.

But one thing is very clear. We must have our ethics rules followed by public officials like Hinman. When they are not followed, the law must be enforced. America is greatest when we have a level playing field and we allow the best technologies and innovations to compete fairly. And we must always stand up against gross government overreach.

This is the chance for the SEC to get something right for once. I hope the OIG issues a complete, fair and well-reasoned report which shows the kind of faithful allegiance to the law that the SEC Enforcement Division and Division of Corporation Finance have clearly failed to show to date.

CONFIRMED: SEC Inspector General in “Final Stages” of Investigation on Crypto Conflicts Referred by Empower Oversight

By Empower Oversight. February 15, 2024.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has disclosed that its Office of Inspector General (OIG) is nearing the end of an investigation related to financial conflict of interest issues identified and referred to the OIG by Empower Oversight in May 2022. It’s the first acknowledgment of an open probe on the matter by the agency’s internal watchdog.

According to the SEC, “OIG has authorized us to inform you that OIG has an open investigation into the matter that they are in the final stages of completing.” Empower Oversight’s referral cited records it obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) raising serious questions about the failures of SEC’s Ethics Office and a senior SEC official, William Hinman, to ensure that he avoided participating in matters where he had a financial interest—including a controversial speech declaring that certain digital assets were not securities subject to SEC enforcement.

Click here for the full article.

Ripple, SEC argue to the very end of years-long legal battle 

By Casey Wagner. (Blockworks). January 25, 2024.

The court has handed down its summary judgment and dropped the remaining charges in the case between the Securities and Exchange Commission and Ripple Labs. Despite these developments, the years-long legal battle is far from over.

Ripple and the SEC continued to spar this week over one of the final steps of the case: what documents the cryptocurrency issuer has to surrender so the court can hand down injunctions and civil penalties. 

The SEC has asked the judge to order Ripple to release its financial statements from 2022 and 2023, and contracts pertaining to institutional sales that are dated after the securities regulator filed its initial complaint in December 2020. 

Read more here: Blockworks.

Since Chairman Patrick McHenry threatened to SUBPOENA Gary Gensler for NON-COMPLIANCE with Congressional oversight.

ACT NOW!