“隨著福克斯商業新聞記者埃莉諾·特雷特（Eleanor Terrett）報告美國證券交易委員會（SEC）和Ripple可能很快達成協議，新希望”

在XRP訴訟的可能轉折點中，福克斯商業新聞記者埃莉諾·特雷特（Eleanor Terrett）週三報導說，美國證券交易委員會（SEC）和Ripple可能很快達成協議。

In a possible turning point for the hotly-discussed XRP lawsuit, Fox Business journalist Eleanor Terrett has reported that the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Ripple might soon reach an agreement to end their dispute.

在炎熱討論的XRP訴訟的可能轉折點中，福克斯商業新聞記者埃莉諾·特雷特（Eleanor Terrett）報告說，美國證券交易委員會（SEC）和Ripple可能很快就會達成協議以結束爭議。

“Two well-placed sources tell me the SEC vs. Ripple case—which has engrossed the crypto world for over 18 months—could be coming to an end soon,” Terrett revealed on Wednesday.

Terrett在周三透露：“有兩個良好的消息來源告訴我SEC與Ripple案（已全神貫注於加密貨幣世界已經有18個月以上）可能很快就會結束。”

According to her sources, the delay in reaching an agreement is due to Ripple’s legal team negotiating more favorable terms regarding August’s district court ruling.

根據她的消息來源，達成協議的延誤是由於Ripple的法律團隊就8月份的地方法院裁決提出了更有利的條款。

That ruling hit Ripple with a $125 million fine and prohibited it from selling XRP to institutional investors. Terrett’s sources suggest the crypto firm’s team is pushing back, insisting that if the SEC’s new leadership aims to “wipe the enforcement slate clean” for previously-targeted crypto firms, then Ripple should not be subject to a judgment that may no longer reflect the agency’s stance.

該裁決以1.25億美元的罰款襲擊了Ripple，並禁止將XRP出售給機構投資者。 Terrett的消息來源表明，加密貨幣公司的團隊正在向後推，並堅持認為，如果SEC的新領導層旨在“擦除執法板塊清潔”，以便為以前的加密貨幣公司“清潔”，那麼Ripple不應受到不再反映該機構立場的判斷。

“There’s no real playbook for this,” Terrett added, emphasizing how this unique scenario may be “taking longer to resolve than the rest.”

Terrett補充說：“沒有真正的劇本。”他強調了這種獨特的場景可能“要花費更長的時間來解決比其他情況更長”。

An Easy Path To End The XRP Lawsuit

結束XRP訴訟的簡單途徑

Pro-XRP attorney Fred Rispoli, meanwhile, contends via X that resolving the dispute over the ruling should be relatively straightforward—if the SEC is willing.

同時，Pro-XRP律師弗雷德·里斯波利（Fred Rispoli）認為，解決裁決的爭議應相對簡單，如果願意的話，應相對簡單。

“I just don’t see this being the big issue some are making it out to be. In the broadest sense, it’s unorthodox, but not overly complicated,” Rispoli remarked.

“我只是看不到這是一些人所說的大問題。從最廣泛的意義上講，這是非正統的，但不是過於復雜。”里斯波利說。

According to Rispoli, there are multiple ways the agency and Ripple could neutralize Judge Torres’ order, which Rispoli believes will be appealed by the SEC if it reaches the Supreme Court.

根據里斯波里（Rispoli）的說法，該機構有多種方法可以中和托雷斯法官的命令，如果瑞斯波利（Rispoli）認為，如果該命令將在最高法院到達最高法院，將對SEC提出上訴。

“The SEC and Ripple can file a motion to vacate the judgment—the cleanest way to dispose of it. Telling the the Court ‘in consideration for potentially losing our entire crypto jurisdiction if we lose the appeal, we’re agreeing to vacate judgment in exchange for Ripple dropping its appeal.’ Torres is not going to second guess this.”

“ SEC和Ripple可以提出動議以撤離判決，這是處理判決的最清潔方法。告訴法院“考慮到我們可能會失去我們的整個加密管轄區，如果我們失去上訴，我們同意撤離判決，以換取波紋，以撤銷其上訴。”托雷斯不會第二次猜測。”

He added that even without formally vacating the order, the SEC could draft an agreement stating it will not enforce the ruling for the same consideration.

他補充說，即使沒有正式撤消該命令，SEC也可以起草一項協議，說該協議將不會為同一考慮而執行該裁決。

“The SEC doesn’t even have to vacate the order. It can simply draft an agreement with Ripple that it won’t enforce the judgment for the same consideration set out.

“ SEC甚至不必撤消訂單。它可以簡單地起草與Ripple的協議，即它不會以相同的考慮來執行判決。

“The SEC Enforcement Manual has all kinds of general, vague language that recommends cooperation and settlement over the uncertainties of litigation so the authority for this behavior is covered—but even if it weren’t, who cares? This isn’t a good thing, but the SEC (and most other .gov agencies) has proven it does what it wants, when it wants, without regard to due process. Here, it works in justice’s favor for once.”

“ SEC執法手冊具有各種通用，模糊的語言，建議對訴訟的不確定性進行合作與解決，因此涵蓋了這種行為的權威，但是即使不是，誰在乎？這不是一件好事，但是SEC（以及大多數其他.Gov機構）已證明它可以在需要時做到自己想要的，而無需考慮正當程序。在這裡，它對正義有幫助。”

Despite Rispoli’s optimism, some community members are concerned about the possibility of stricter enforcement returning with different leadership in the future.

儘管里斯波利樂觀，但一些社區成員仍然擔心更嚴格的執法可能會在未來以不同的領導能力返回。

One user asked: “What if, say, in 4 years, we are back to a Gensler-style SEC and the SEC then tries to enforce the injunction?”

一位用戶問：“如果說4年後，我們回到了Gensler型SEC，而SEC則試圖執行禁令？”

To this, Rispoli replied:

為此，里斯波利回答：

“That’s the ONLY fear—and one that could be wiped out with a superseding agreement between SEC and Ripple. And if your scenario happens, crypto already lost and a lot more folks than just Ripple would be worried.”

“這是唯一的恐懼，也是SEC和Ripple之間的取代協議可以消除的恐懼。而且，如果您的情況發生了，加密貨幣已經丟失了，而不僅僅是波紋的人會更加擔心。”

Can A Court’s Decision Really Be Overridden?

法院的決定真的可以被覆蓋嗎？

A second point of contention involves whether or not the SEC can effectively negate a district court’s decision through a negotiated settlement. Critics argue that administrative agencies should not have the authority to overturn final rulings made by Article III courts.

第二點涉及SEC是否可以通過談判解決方案有效地否定地方法院的裁決。批評者認為，行政機構不應有權推翻第三條法院的最終裁決。

Rispoli, however, referenced a notable precedent involving Citigroup. He pointed to SEC v. Citigroup Global Markets, Inc., 673 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2012), where an appellate court reversed a district judge’s refusal to approve an SEC settlement.

然而，里斯波利提到了涉及花旗集團的顯著先例。他指出，第673 F.3d 158（2dCir。2012）的Secv。CitigroupGlobal Markets，Inc。，在那裡，上訴法院撤銷了地方法院法官拒絕批准SEC解決方案。

“It’s happened before,” he noted, adding that courts typically grant substantial deference to consent decrees and settlement agreements proposed by the SEC and the entities it aims to sanction. In that case, the Second Circuit ruled that the district judge erred by failing to defer to the SEC’s judgment in accepting a settlement.

他指出：“這是以前發生的。在這種情況下，第二巡迴法院裁定，地方法官未能遵守SEC接受和解的判決而犯了錯誤。

At press time, XRP traded at $2.21.

發稿時，XRP的交易價格為2.21美元。