XRP Price Potential Was Stifled by Regulatory ‘Winner-Picking,’ According to Legal Experts

XRP (XRP-USD) supporters and legal experts are once again diving into the history of the industry to ask if regulators picked winners through uneven enforcement. The debate between pro-XRP attorney Bill Morgan and former SEC lawyer Marc Fagel has reignited as the market looks back at the long-term impact of the now-settled Ripple lawsuit. While the legal battle officially ended in August 2025 with a $125 million settlement, the argument continues over whether the four-year delay allowed competing cryptocurrencies to gain an unshakeable lead in adoption and market value.

President's Day Sale - 70% Off

• Unlock hedge fund-level data and powerful investing tools for smarter, sharper decisions
• Stay ahead of the market with the latest news and analysis and maximize your portfolio's potential

Morgan Argues Selective Enforcement

The discussion began when Bill Morgan suggested that the SEC’s early decisions may have shaped today’s market structure. He argued that several early crypto projects held token launches or used aggressive market promotion but were never targeted by regulators. According to Morgan, this allowed a small number of assets to grow without the massive legal pressure that eventually hit Ripple. He believes this uneven approach gave specific cryptocurrencies a long-term advantage, essentially helping them capture a lion’s share of the market while XRP was stuck in a courtroom.

Fagel Defends Regulatory Logic

Marc Fagel pushed back on the idea that the SEC was intentionally picking winners. He explained that the commission cannot bring a securities case unless it can identify a clear company or “issuer” responsible for the asset.

In the case of Bitcoin, there was no central entity to sue, which made enforcement logically impossible. Fagel also argued that even if the SEC had the resources to go after every single project, those missing cases would not change the facts of whether Ripple itself broke securities laws. He noted that Ripple’s own legal team argued in court that most XRP buyers were not actually relying on the company’s efforts, which makes it harder to blame the SEC for the token’s price performance.

Did the Legal Cloud Actually Hurt XRP’s Growth?

The two attorneys also disagreed on how much the legal cloud actually hurt XRP’s growth. Morgan emphasized that because Ripple was building almost all the early real-world use cases for the asset, a lawsuit against the company was effectively a lawsuit against the token’s utility. He pointed out that while XRP often follows Bitcoin’s price moves, the legal battle undeniably damaged investor perception and caused many U.S. exchanges to delist the token for years.

Even with the current regulatory clarity and the launch of new XRP ETFs, supporters like Morgan believe the lawsuit excuse has only recently run its course, leaving the asset to finally compete on a level playing field.

Key Takeaway

Essentially, this is a “chicken or the egg” argument that will likely never end. Supporters of XRP feel like the government put them in a cage for four years while everyone else was allowed to run free. On the other side, regulators and their defenders say they were just following the law where they could actually find someone to sue. Now that the handcuffs are off and the fine has been paid, the real test is beginning. If XRP can’t regain its old spot near the top of the charts now that it has legal clarity, it might prove that the market has simply moved on to newer things.

At the time of writing, XRP is sitting at $1.47.

Copyright © 2026, TipRanks. All rights reserved.