A prominent legal expert known as “Metalawman” on X provided an update on the recent SEC v. Kraken, which took place in a federal court in San Francisco.
A prominent legal expert known as “Metalawman” on X provided an update on the recent SEC v. Kraken, which took place in a federal court in San Francisco.
An oral argument was held yesterday on Kraken’s motion to dismiss the SEC’s enforcement action. Kraken’s motion to dismiss focuses on Howey and maintains that the SEC did not allege that securities transactions occurred on the Kraken platform.
Kraken garnered plenty of amicus support for its motion, with Senator Lummis, the Blockchain Association, the DeFi Education Fund, the Chamber of Digital Commerce, the Investor Choice Advocates Network, Paradigm, and two administrative law scholars submitting briefs.
The recently held court hearing, which focused on Kraken’s motion to dismiss, concluded with a notable statement from Judge William Orrick. Before arguments were presented, Judge Orrick expressed his inclination to follow the rulings of Judges Rakoff and Failla, indicating a likely denial of Kraken’s motion to dismiss.
Tomiwabold Olajidemetallawman observed that the arguments presented during the hearing did not appear to influence Judge Orrick’s initial mindset. This development implies that the Kraken case could likely lead to years of costly discoveries, similar to the ongoing Ripple case.
Adding a layer of historical context, Metalawman noted that Judge Orrick’s uncle served as SEC commissioner in the 1950s. This family connection to the SEC adds an interesting dimension to the judge’s current role in the case.
The decision to deny the motion to dismiss could suggest that Kraken could face a protracted legal battle with the SEC, involving significant resources and prolonged scrutiny. As the case develops, the cryptocurrency community and legal experts will follow it closely, given its potential implications for the digital assets regulatory landscape.
