A new motion in the Ripple vs. SEC lawsuit could finally bring the case to an end. Ripple and the SEC have requested that the court modify Judge Torres’ previous orders—but not everyone agrees with the logic. Pro-XRP Lawyer Bill Morgan shared his thoughts, raising doubts about whether this request truly meets the court’s high standard of “exceptional circumstances.”
So, is this a clever shortcut to peace, or just Ripple asking for too much?
Ripple’s Last-Minute Ask
Ripple and the SEC have come together in a joint motion asking Judge Torres to adjust the final settlement terms. Specifically, Ripple wants the penalty amount reduced from $125 million to $50 million, with the remaining $75 million of the escrowed funds returned to Ripple.
The motion also requests that the court lift the injunction that has restricted Ripple’s institutional XRP sales since August 2024
According to Bill Morgan, this request is what’s holding up the appeal and cross-appeal from moving forward. If the judge agrees, the case wraps up completely, saving court time and effort.
But there’s one problem—it’s not guaranteed.
The Court’s Standard: “Exceptional” or Just Convenient?
Morgan points out that while both sides claim that the modification is in everyone’s best interest, the court requires more than convenience. The judge must see “exceptional circumstances” to change a final court order.
Critics argue Ripple and the SEC didn’t need to make this part of the settlement. It was their own decision—especially Ripple’s—to push for more.
The judge previously rejected a similar motion in May 2025 due to insufficient justification, but the June 12 filing addresses those concerns more directly.
Will the Judge Say Yes?
While Morgan says he feels Judge Torres might grant the request, he also warns not to be too sure. The court could just as easily say no, forcing both sides to stick with the original rulings or withdraw the settlement altogether.
All eyes are now on June 16, 2025, the day the SEC must submit a status report to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
