Coinbase Slams SEC for Regulating through Enforcement, Not Rulemaking

• Coinbase responded to the SEC’s arguments towards the mandamus petition.
• In keeping with Coinbase, the SEC’s actions offered justifiable causes for a mandamus to be issued.
• On Might 15, the SEC filed a response towards Coinbase’s writ of mandamus petition.

Coinbase responded to the Safety and Trade Fee’s (SEC) Might 15 arguments towards the writ of Mandamus petition. Within the submitting, Coinbase reiterated that the writ of mandamus is a essential treatment as they level out the SEC’s problematic rulemaking. “Mandamus is the tailored treatment for the extraordinary info introduced right here,” tweeted Coinbase CLO Paul Grewal.

Intimately, Coinbase responded to the SEC’s arguments by declaring a number of explanation why a Mandamus was warranted. Amongst different issues, Coinbase identified that the SEC has ignored different crypto business petitions for years; ignored its obligations to create authorized requirements by way of rulemaking, not enforcement; and the unreasonable delay in responding to rulemaking petitions.

The SEC’s simultaneous enforcement marketing campaign is imposing important and rapid harms, but in addition as a result of — because the SEC tacitly concedes — firms are being prosecuted for failing to trod a regulatory path that the SEC itself refuses to offer.

Beforehand, on Might 15, the SEC filed a response towards Coinbase’s Mandamus petition. Within the doc, the SEC argued that Coinbase had no authorized authority to file the petition and was presenting unfounded claims to help the mandamus. Moreover, the SEC acknowledged that it was not obligated to problem new rules concerning digital property.

On April 24, Coinbase World Inc. filed a petition for a writ of Mandamus to the SEC. Coinbase filed the mandamus petition in an try to influence the SEC to behave on Coinbase’s earlier July 21, 2022 rulemaking petition, which sought to ascertain new digital asset rules.