Ripple says ’we are so close’ as U.S. Senate weighs crypto market structure framework
Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse said the company is “so close” to resolving its long-running U.S. legal dispute with the Securities and Exchange Commission as the Senate considers a crypto market structure framework. Senators have begun hearings and discussions aimed at clarifying regulatory jurisdiction, market oversight and investor protections for digital-asset markets. The debate centers on defining which federal agencies should regulate cryptocurrencies, and how to apply securities laws to tokens and exchanges. Ripple’s comment came amid broader industry pressure for clearer rules after years of enforcement actions and uncertainty. Market participants are watching for potential legislative language that could shield certain crypto activities from SEC enforcement or assign rule-making to other regulators such as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Traders should monitor developments in Congress, any compromise language, and legal updates from the Ripple v. SEC case, as these could materially affect XRP’s regulatory status, exchange listings, institutional participation and overall market liquidity.
Neutral
The news is categorised as neutral because it signals potential regulatory clarity rather than an immediate market-moving event. Positive outcomes—such as legislation that limits SEC enforcement or clarifies token classifications—would be bullish for XRP and broader crypto markets by reducing legal risk and encouraging listings and institutional flows. Conversely, legislation reinforcing strict securities treatment or adverse rulings in Ripple v. SEC would be bearish. Historically, regulatory clarity tends to produce medium-term bullish effects (e.g., clearer rules enabling institutional adoption), while enforcement actions or negative court decisions cause sharp, short-term sell-offs (as seen after major SEC actions). In the short term, traders may see volatility around hearings, bill drafts and court updates. In the medium to long term, the impact depends on the specifics of any framework: pro-market clarity generally supports higher liquidity and risk-on positioning; restrictive outcomes could constrain trading volumes and institutional participation.