A Theory of Market Pressure
According to Jesse, one possible explanation behind the lawsuit was to temporarily suppress $XRP’s price. This, he suggested, could have allowed time for institutional partnerships and ecosystem development without excessive retail speculation.
He described the situation as a “teeter,” implying a controlled balancing act rather than a full-scale attack.
“I always thought it was just all teeter… to justify a low price so they have time to incentivize partners,” he added.
Doubt Creeps In After New Revelations
However, Jesse acknowledged that his perspective shifted after reviewing what he referred to as newly surfaced documents, which hinted at the possibility of a more deliberate attempt to target $XRP.
“When the files came out… showing they were trying to attack $XRP, I started to think maybe it wasn’t just a teeter,” he said.
Despite this, he remains uncertain, estimating only a “20% chance” that the lawsuit represented a fully genuine regulatory action rather than a coordinated move.
Market Impact and Ongoing Debate
The $XRP lawsuit has had a profound impact on the cryptocurrency’s price, adoption, and regulatory perception since it began. While parts of the case have moved toward resolution, discussions like Jesse’s show that questions around intent, fairness, and broader implications remain far from settled.
Whether viewed as a calculated strategy or a legitimate enforcement action, the $XRP case continues to shape how regulators and investors approach the wider crypto market.