The post Coinbase CLO Uses Bump Stock Gun Case Against SEC, Here’s What it Means! appeared first on Coinpedia Fintech News

Coinbase’s Chief Legal Officer, Paul Grewal, has boldly positioned the company in its legal battle with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Drawing parallels to a recent Supreme Court case involving bump stock guns, Grewal aims to counter the SEC amid its multiple lawsuits against crypto industry participants.

Grewal On SEC’s Overreach -A Fair Trial or a Forced Litigation?

Recently, Paul Grewal, the Chief Legal Officer (CLO) of Coinbase, engaged in a legal tangle against a US court ruling that favored the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The ruling, which labeled certain crypto assets traded on secondary markets as securities, was met with criticism from Grewal. He drew parallels to a notable Supreme Court case involving bump stock guns, highlighting what he saw as inconsistencies and a lack of transparency in regulatory enforcement.

In a recent X post, Grewal cited a conversation between Justice Gorsuch and a government official on the bump stock gun case. He also pointed out the sudden change in how the government interprets a law from the 1930s.

He further highlighted the sudden change in how a statute from the 1930s is interpreted, questioning the fairness and lack of opportunity for people to defend themselves. He criticized the SEC’s tactic of obtaining default judgments, stating it hinders defendants from presenting their case, causing an unfair legal process.

SEC’s Move To Drag Binance is Concerning 

Moreover, Grewal’s criticism extended to the SEC’s handling of the Binance Holdings case. In the court filing, the SEC alleged insider trading by former Coinbase employee Ishan Wahi and others. The SEC claims Wahi shared confidential Coinbase information with his brother and friend, leading to insider trading. The SEC further solidified its position by citing a prior ruling by Judge Rakoff in the SEC’s case against Terraform Labs and Do Kwon. In that instance, tokens like LUNA and MIR were classified as securities, providing additional backing for the SEC’s stance on the nature of crypto assets traded on platforms. 

However, as per the ruling by Judge Tana Lin, a default judgment was passed, confirming that the trading of certain crypto assets on a secondary exchange should indeed be considered securities. This decision came about because of the SEC’s argument that these crypto assets were initially offered and sold as investment contracts, meeting the criteria outlined in the Howey test.

Overall, the implications of these legal developments are quite concerning for the cryptocurrency industry and Coinbase’s ongoing legal battles. Grewal’s outspoken stance adds depth to the ongoing discourse surrounding regulatory oversight and enforcement in the rapidly evolving landscape of digital assets.

The post Coinbase CLO Uses Bump Stock Gun Case Against SEC, Here’s What it Means! appeared first on Coinpedia Fintech News

Coinbase’s Chief Legal Officer, Paul Grewal, has boldly positioned the company in its legal battle with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Drawing parallels to a recent Supreme Court case involving bump stock guns, Grewal aims to counter the SEC amid its multiple lawsuits against crypto industry participants.

Grewal On SEC’s Overreach -A Fair Trial or a Forced Litigation?

Recently, Paul Grewal, the Chief Legal Officer (CLO) of Coinbase, engaged in a legal tangle against a US court ruling that favored the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The ruling, which labeled certain crypto assets traded on secondary markets as securities, was met with criticism from Grewal. He drew parallels to a notable Supreme Court case involving bump stock guns, highlighting what he saw as inconsistencies and a lack of transparency in regulatory enforcement.

In a recent X post, Grewal cited a conversation between Justice Gorsuch and a government official on the bump stock gun case. He also pointed out the sudden change in how the government interprets a law from the 1930s.

He further highlighted the sudden change in how a statute from the 1930s is interpreted, questioning the fairness and lack of opportunity for people to defend themselves. He criticized the SEC’s tactic of obtaining default judgments, stating it hinders defendants from presenting their case, causing an unfair legal process.

SEC’s Move To Drag Binance is Concerning 

Moreover, Grewal’s criticism extended to the SEC’s handling of the Binance Holdings case. In the court filing, the SEC alleged insider trading by former Coinbase employee Ishan Wahi and others. The SEC claims Wahi shared confidential Coinbase information with his brother and friend, leading to insider trading. The SEC further solidified its position by citing a prior ruling by Judge Rakoff in the SEC’s case against Terraform Labs and Do Kwon. In that instance, tokens like LUNA and MIR were classified as securities, providing additional backing for the SEC’s stance on the nature of crypto assets traded on platforms. 

However, as per the ruling by Judge Tana Lin, a default judgment was passed, confirming that the trading of certain crypto assets on a secondary exchange should indeed be considered securities. This decision came about because of the SEC’s argument that these crypto assets were initially offered and sold as investment contracts, meeting the criteria outlined in the Howey test.

Overall, the implications of these legal developments are quite concerning for the cryptocurrency industry and Coinbase’s ongoing legal battles. Grewal’s outspoken stance adds depth to the ongoing discourse surrounding regulatory oversight and enforcement in the rapidly evolving landscape of digital assets.