Ripple’s General Counsel: Regulatory Hostility in US Ultimately Hurts Retail Investors

Earlier this week, at a event organised by Politico, Stuart Aldertoy, who is General Counsel at Ripple, talked about the detrimental effects of “regulatory hostility” toward crypto in the U.S.

Aldertoy’s comments were made on September 20 during a conversation with Cally Baute, who is a Senior VP at Politico, at an event called “Writing the Rules of Crypto“.

As you may remember, on 22 December 2020, the SEC announced that it had “filed an action against Ripple Labs Inc. and two of its executives, who are also significant security holders, alleging that they raised over $1.3 billion through an unregistered, ongoing digital asset securities offering.”

According to a report by The Daly Hodl, Ripple’s General Counsel said:

“In the past two years, we had the strongest years ever as a company. That $10 billion in volume mostly is driven offshore. And by the way this is all done compliant with anti-money laundering laws, OFAC [Office of Foreign Assets Control] laws, anti-sanction laws etc. Why is that? Why haven’t we signed a single US customer in the past two years? Because of regulatory uncertainty and really regulatory hostility…

“What we are doing here in the US and I think principally through the SEC as an institution, is we’re elevating politics and power over sound policy. And in doing that, you’re not only hurting innovation and innovators and entrepreneurs like Ripple and others… but ultimately you’re hurting the retail holder of this asset.“

TUNE IN NOW to “Writing the Rules of Crypto” #POLITICOTech https://t.co/qC1Uw1JdDb

— POLITICO Live (@POLITICOLive) September 20, 2022

On September 21, Aldertoy talked to CoinDesk TV’s flagship show “First Mover” about the SEC’s ongoing lawsuit against Ripple:

“I do believe that this policy in the United States of regulation by enforcement is a failed policy, and it’s creating havoc in the marketplace, and that havoc it in the marketplace ultimately hurts the very retail consumer that the SEC purports to protect.

“I think what we’re seeing is power and politics elevated over sound policy, and that is not a good thing. To your question, ‘why ripple?’… That is a good question. I’m not sure I have a good answer to i, but what I will tell you is that the lawsuit was filed on December 22nd 2020 on the last day of the prior administration when Jay Clayton was the chair of the SEC. The day after the lawsuit was filed, Jay Clayton left office, and within two weeks of the lawsuit being filed, the entire senior leadership team that was I think involved in the decision to file the lawsuit left the SEC.

“So why Ripple? I’m not really sure. I think we can all venture a bunch of different guesses. Maybe the SEC was tired of playing whack-a-mole with some smaller tokens, and they felt that if they could go after Ripple and indirectly attack the digital asset XRP, which Ripple relies on to facilitate its cross-border payments, maybe they thought that they can send a broader message to the entire market.

“But I think what they’ve learnt is that if you challenge a well-resourced company, that well-resourced company can put on a very robust defence and really expose the SEC that what they’re doing in this case is not applying the law. It’s not a faithful allegiance to the law. They’re seeking to remake the law, and they don’t have the power to remake the law. Only Congress can remake the law.“

«This policy of regulation by enforcement is a failed policy,» @Ripple General Counsel @s_alderoty says.

He chats about the @SECgov case, saying the agency is «seeking to remake the law, and they don’t have the power … only Congress can.»

Watch more: https://t.co/MzhzCOj66d pic.twitter.com/kpevUCX6vb

— CoinDesk (@CoinDesk) September 22, 2022

Source