The post Ripple Vs SEC : Pro-XRP Lawyer Explains How Judge Torress ‘Made It ‘More Difficult’ For SEC To Appeal appeared first on Coinpedia Fintech News
After the summary judgment in favor of Ripple in the ongoing XRP vs. SEC lawsuit, Gary Gensler, the Chair of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), has chosen to remain tight-lipped about the commission’s next course of action.
Attorney Jeremy Hogan provided his analysis and interpretation of the Ripple lawsuit ruling by Judge Torres. He discussed key aspects of the case, including the surprise he experienced during the judge’s ruling.
Hogan began by shedding light on the role of appellate courts, emphasizing that they focus on matters of law, not on evaluating the credibility of witnesses or finding facts. In the context of the Ripple case, Judge Torres acted as the “Trier of fact,” evaluating the evidence and witness testimonies to determine the truth.
He praised Judge Torres for her clever approach in phrasing the order, which incorporated various factual findings. This tactic makes it challenging for an appellate court to dispute her ruling, as they usually rely on the trial court’s findings of fact.
“The way the judge Torres phrased her order, I thought was very clever and very good because instead of ruling on this issue as a matter of law, she really picked up a lot of little facts that she found during the case and put them into her order which makes it more difficult for an appellate court to come back and say judge Torres you’re wrong.”
In response to a question about whether legal arguments with non-lawyers could be challenging, Hogan stressed the importance of respectful discussions and avoiding arguments based solely on one’s profession. He noted that non-lawyers can make valid points, and it is essential to consider all perspectives in legal matters.
He added, “By making it a very factual based order on the Howey test, she kind of, I don’t want to say appeal-proofed it, but she made it much more difficult to appeal.”