Just In: US SEC Files Motion for Judgment Against Kraken, Challenges Key Defenses

As a seasoned analyst with over two decades of experience navigating the intricate world of financial regulations and market dynamics, I find myself closely following the latest developments in the SEC vs Kraken case. The SEC’s motion for judgment, led by Chairman Gary Gensler, seems to be a strategic move aimed at limiting further scrutiny into their regulatory policies, particularly those concerning the crypto sector.


The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has submitted a request for a ruling in their lawsuit against the digital currency trading platform, Kraken. Their main points of contention include the “fair notice” principle and the “major questions doctrine.

This action taken by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), spearheaded by Chairman Gary Gensler’s group, is designed to restrict deeper exploration into the agency’s regulatory practices, particularly those impacting the cryptocurrency field. The submission of this filing at this specific moment has generated interest, as some within the industry interpret it as a tactical move to safeguard the SEC’s procedures from more scrutiny.

US SEC Files Motion for Judgment Against Kraken

In simpler terms, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is attempting to throw out the arguments made by Kraken, which include the “fair notice” defense and the “major questions doctrine.” The “fair notice” defense claims that Kraken was not given proper regulatory guidance concerning their cryptocurrency-related activities.

Essentially, the principle known as the “major questions doctrine” implies that government bodies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ought to avoid making significant policy decisions unless they have explicit instructions or guidance from Congress.

Afterward, it seems that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s request aims to halt further investigation into their policies, which Kraken and other crypto supporters have criticized as confusing and inconsistent. A comparable request was made in the Ripple case, where the U.S. SEC did not succeed in obtaining a verdict. Michael O’Connor, an attorney representing Kraken, anticipates a similar result in the Kraken case, although Kraken has suggested that they have additional defenses if this motion moves forward.

This Is A Breaking News, Please Check Back For More

Read More

2024-11-06 23:23